Client participation in an international plant construction project
In 2011, the client, the owner of several investment enterprises, began participating in an international project together with Russian companies, including structures affiliated with Rosatom. The project involved the construction of an industrial plant in Brazil and was positioned as strategically important for both the Russian participants and the host country. The client’s companies were responsible for part of the external financing, logistics and contractual support of the project. Initially, the project developed without pretensions, with the active participation of government agencies and business partners.
Blocking of investment company accounts in Cyprus
However, after a few years, serious obstacles arose in the way of the project. Due to suspicions of a possible connection of one of the shareholders with the supply of uranium to Iran, the Cypriot bank servicing the client’s investment company blocked its accounts. This blockage became critical: the project actually stopped, and the Russian participants began to experience financial losses. Despite the fact that the client himself was not related to the suspected shareholder and was not the subject of the investigation, it was his companies that were at the center of the claims from Russia.
Arbitration disputes and their results
After the project was stopped and accounts in Cyprus were blocked, Russian partners filed claims for damages. Arbitration proceedings took place in several jurisdictions. The Russian side demanded compensation for missed deadlines and non-fulfillment of contracts.
The client was not involved in the actions that caused the blocking. This was confirmed in arbitrations: the courts recognized that there was no evidence of his responsibility. All claims were rejected.
After the defeat in the courts, the Russian side changed its approach and initiated a criminal case. Thus, the economic dispute was transferred to the criminal legal plane with an attempt to use the Interpol search.
Initiation of a criminal case and involvement of Interpol
After the completion of arbitration proceedings, in which the Russian side failed, a new stage of pressure began – no longer in civil law, but in criminal law. A criminal case was opened in Russia in which the client was accused of participating in a criminal group that was allegedly involved in money laundering and violating the international sanctions regime. As a legal basis, the investigation referred to the fact of blocking the company’s accounts in Cyprus, despite the fact that this measure was applied by the bank in accordance with internal regulations and concerned another shareholder. No new evidence was presented to support the client’s involvement in illegal activities.
It should be emphasized that the criminal prosecution began after all civil trials had been completed, which indicates a clear attempt to use the criminal case as a tool of pressure. After the initiation of the case, Russian law enforcement agencies prepared and sent a request to Interpol to place the client on the international wanted list. The appearance of a notice in the Interpol system significantly increased the risks of arrest abroad and restrictions on the client’s movements, especially in the countries of the European Union.
Filing a complaint to the Interpol File Control Commission
Recognizing that the criminal case bears the hallmarks of politically motivated prosecution, our legal team began to defend the client at the international level. An appeal was promptly prepared to the Commission for the Control of Interpol Files (CCF) with a request to cancel the notification and stop processing personal data as part of the search.
In the complaint, we set out in detail the arguments about the illegality of the case, its connection with previously lost arbitration claims and the lack of evidence. We indicated that the client had nothing to do with the actions charged in the criminal case, and that the information sent to Interpol was taken out of context and distorted. In addition, we focused attention on violations committed when submitting the notification, including the lack of analysis of compliance with the Statute and the Interpol Data Processing Regulations.
Detention of a client in Hungary and refusal of extradition
While waiting for a response from the Interpol Commission, a client was detained at the airport in Hungary during his business trip. The arrest was made on the basis of an international search request uploaded to the Interpol database. This was a real confirmation of how quickly and without preliminary legal assessment the Interpol mechanism can work – even in controversial cases.
Immediately after the arrest, extradition proceedings were initiated. The Russian side sent an official request for extradition, citing the criminal case and the wanted status. However, already during the preliminary hearing, the Hungarian authorities expressed doubts about the legality of the charges. It was found that the case was based on a civil dispute, which had previously been settled by court decisions, and the materials did not contain specific data confirming the client’s guilt.
As a result, the Hungarian court refused extradition, emphasizing that the case was predominantly economic in nature, with possible signs of a political component, as well as vulnerability in terms of compliance with the procedural rights of the accused. This decision provided important guidance for both the Commission and the defence.
Suspension of data processing at Interpol
Taking into account the seriousness of the arguments we presented and the simultaneous decision of the Hungarian court, the Interpol Commission made an important procedural decision – to suspend the processing of data concerning our client until the consideration of the complaint on the merits is completed. This means that during the verification, information about the search ceased to be available to other participating countries.
The temporary blocking mechanism is used by Interpol in cases where, already at the stage of analyzing the received complaint, reasonable doubts arise about the admissibility of the notification. This measure is preventive in nature and allows you to protect the person from further consequences until a final decision is made. In the context of the case under consideration, it became a logical continuation of a successful legal strategy and strengthened the client’s position in further negotiations and legal proceedings abroad.
Decision of the Commission and legal qualification of the case
After a comprehensive analysis of the documents provided, legal arguments and supporting materials, the Interpol Files Control Commission came to a clear conclusion: the wanted notice violates the provisions of the Interpol Data Processing Regulations. The main argument was the establishment of the fact that criminal prosecution was initiated only after the Russian side had exhausted civil legal means of resolving the conflict. The arbitration courts did not support the position of the plaintiff, and after that a criminal case was initiated, which, in the opinion of the Commission, indicates abuse of criminal jurisdiction to achieve economic goals.
The Commission also drew attention to lack of a clear and justified role of the client in the incriminated acts. The submission did not contain sufficient evidence to convince a neutral observer of the client’s direct involvement in the alleged criminal activity. The Commission emphasized that such accusations cannot serve as a basis for inclusion in the international search database, especially if there are doubts about the reliability of the sources and the motivation of the initiating party.
The decision stated that there is no causal relationship between the client’s actions and the alleged offenses, and the wording used in the notification does not meet the requirements of specificity and reasonableness imposed by Interpol. Taking into account all of the above, the Commission declared the notification invalid and ordered the complete removal of all data associated with it from the Interpol information system.
Conclusions on the case and international legal significance
This case was a good example of how an economic dispute can be transformed into criminal prosecution in jurisdictions with limited separation of powers and dependent judicial systems. It also illustrates how international mechanisms, including Interpol, can be misused – not to ensure law and order, but as a tool to put pressure on businesses or individuals outside the initiating country.
Interpol’s intervention, if carried out on the basis of unverified and politically biased information, jeopardizes the credibility of the international legal assistance system. Therefore, it is so important that each search request undergoes strict legal filtering, especially when it comes to cases accompanied by signs of economic conflict and international interest.
The legal defense of the client in this case demonstrated how effectively it is possible to resist international persecution if there is professional support, prompt response and in-depth processing of the complaint. The temporary blocking of the data, the subsequent permanent cancellation of the notification, and Hungary’s refusal of extradition strengthened the precedent for individual rights in the international justice system.
In addition, this case has broad international legal significance. He emphasizes the need to reform Interpol’s system, including strengthening pre-diffusion and notification mechanisms, as well as developing independent monitoring of politically sensitive cases. It became an important signal for both lawyers and international organizations: legal protection is possible, but requires persistence, consistency and a deep understanding of the mechanisms of transnational jurisdiction.
