How INTERPOL Red Notices Are Weaponised Against Asylum Seekers

Why Resolution No. 9 (2017) Fails to Protect Refugees in Practice

Asylum seekers flee persecution, political repression, violence, and grave human rights violations. International law is unequivocal – individuals who qualify for refugee protection must not be criminalised, detained arbitrarily, or returned to danger.

1. To prevent criminals and terrorists from abusing refugee status, INTERPOL Resolution No. 9 (2017) was adopted to ensure that international police cooperation does not undermine legitimate asylum protections.
2. In theory, the resolution represents an important safeguard. In practice, it is routinely ignored, manipulated, or rendered ineffective, allowing authoritarian states to transform the asylum process into a legal trap.

Key Provisions of Resolution No. 9 (2017):

1. 1. INTERPOL deletes Red Notices and Diffusions when a person is officially recognised as a refugee (*An asylum seeker whose application has been approved).
   2. Member states must confirm refugee status to INTERPOL for deletion to occur.
   3. If asylum is denied, INTERPOL retains the data.
   4. If refugee status is revoked, the Red Notice or Diffusion may be restored.

In theory, this resolution should protect asylum seekers. In practice, it does not.

The Reality: How Red Notices Still Harm Asylum Seekers

States with documented records of political repression – including Russia, China, Turkey, and Venezuela – systematically abuse INTERPOL’s Red Notice system to target political opponents, dissidents, journalists, and former officials who have sought asylum abroad.

Despite not being arrest warrants, Red Notices often result in:

• • Arrests
  • Immigration detention
  • Visa cancellations
  • Travel bans
  • Prolonged incarceration pending clarification

In the United States, immigration authorities such as Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security routinely treat Red Notices as indicators of criminality. Immigration judges frequently misinterpret them as evidence, reversing the presumption of innocence and denying bond.

Case Example: Asylum Becomes a Trigger for Arrest

A Venezuelan asylum seeker in the United States was arrested immediately after attending his asylum interview due to a politically motivated Red Notice. He remained detained for months before successfully challenging the notice before INTERPOL.

His case illustrates a systemic failure where even asylum seekers are effectively presumed guilty until they manage to prove political persecution, often while detained.

For more information on how you can challenge a Red Notice, click here.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What are INTERPOL’s Objectives? Find more. 

2. Is INTERPOL’s Notices System being abused? Find more.

3. Can you sue INTERPOL? Find more. 

4. What Is the Difference Between Red Notice Deletion and Blocking? Find more.