INTERPOL has deleted a Diffusion concerning our client, a dual Russian‑Cypriot national, finding that criminal allegations of misappropriating RUB 438 million and laundering RUB 178 million concerned a commercial dispute rather than a criminal matter.

Deletion Decision

Our client, a dual Russian‑Cypriot national, was accused of misappropriating RUB 438 million of funds from a consumer credit club he managed and laundering the proceeds. An arrest warrant was subsequently issued, forming the basis of a Diffusion notice circulated by the Russian National Central Bureau (NCB). The Russian Commercial Courts had already considered the underlying facts, finding that our client was not liable for the losses allegedly suffered and had committed no wrongdoing.

The criminal case itself included a number of procedural irregularities, including the falsification of procedural documents and an ‘off the record’ plea bargain. There were also suspicions that the prosecution was being improperly pursued for political reasons or as the result of corruption in the Russian justice system. Having considered both our client’s detailed submissions and responses to questions put to the Russian NCB, the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files found that:

• • The allegations lacked specific detail about our client’s role.
  • The description of facts provided by the NCB did not meet INTERPOL’s standards for clarity and precision.
  • The case appeared to be commercial in nature, rather than a criminal matter.

Accordingly, the Commission ruled that the data was not compliant with INTERPOL’s rules and ordered its deletion. Having found the case to be of a commercial nature, the Commission did not decide on the procedural irregularities or political motivation.

Comment

When seeking arrest and extradition, the Russian authorities frequently rely on the use of Diffusions. Whilst INTERPOL has committed to reviewing all Diffusions circulated by the Russian authorities before publication, that review is based on information provided by the NCB. If a client anticipates that a Diffusion will be circulated, it is possible to challenge its publication in advance if INTERPOL is put on notice. Whilst that was not available in this case, the detailed representations and supporting evidence were sufficient to demonstrate to INTERPOL that the Diffusion was unlawful. Even though INTERPOL’s stated function is not to evaluate the evidence in a criminal case, we were successfully able to show that the facts of the case did not meet the criminal threshold.