The short answer. More serious than people assume. Article 83 of INTERPOL's Rules on the Processing of Data allows a Red Notice only for a "serious ordinary-law crime" carrying a maximum penalty of at least two years' imprisonment — or, for a person sought to serve a sentence, at least six months left to serve. INTERPOL publishes a list of offences that never qualify, and its own Commission has deleted notices because the crime behind them was petty.
A warrant proves that a country wants you — not that the offence is serious enough for INTERPOL.
The floor written into the rules
Article 83 sets cumulative conditions for every Red Notice: a serious ordinary-law crime, and a penalty threshold — a maximum of at least two years’ imprisonment for a person sought for prosecution, at least six months still to serve for a person sought to serve a sentence. Three categories are excluded outright — offences raising controversial questions of behavioural or cultural norms, family or private matters, and administrative regulations or private disputes — unless the conduct is aimed at facilitating a serious crime or linked to organised crime. INTERPOL’s own published list gives examples: prostitution and gestational surrogacy; adultery, bigamy, abortion and non-payment of child support; traffic violations, defamation and unfunded cheques.
What “serious” means when the Commission reads a file
The Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files reads the facts beneath the label on the warrant. In 2019 it deleted a notice over a bounced cheque, finding that “the mere act of issuing an unfunded cheque where no criminal intent has been demonstrated does not meet the criteria of a ‘serious ordinary-law crime.’” The same year it deleted another: “in light of the reservation of Red Notices for serious crimes, the case of the Applicant concerns a petty crime that does not meet the requirements of Articles 35 and 83”. In 2024, “doubts identified earlier on the seriousness of the offence”, with a country’s silence on the applicant’s defence rights, “cumulatively raise concern over the compliance of the data”. It cuts both ways: a potential penalty of seven years has counted in a notice’s favour.
The threshold is a floor, not a formality. A notice that sits on it can be challenged on that ground alone.
Why it matters for your own file
If your matter sits near the floor — a first offence, a modest sum, a regulatory breach charged as a crime, a sentence measured in months — seriousness is a ground in its own right, one the Commission has accepted. The evidence is documentary: the charging instrument and its statutory penalty range, any civil proceedings over the same facts, the amount at stake, and the absence of any organised-crime link. Where a debt or a family dispute has been dressed as fraud, the seriousness argument and the private-matter argument reinforce each other: Can a Red Notice be issued for a debt?.
Related
- Can a Red Notice be issued for a debt?
- Can a Red Notice be used in a private dispute?
- Which INTERPOL rules get a Red Notice deleted?
- INTERPOL's Rules on the Processing of Data, Article 83 — specific conditions for publication of red notices — interpol.int
- INTERPOL, 'List of specific offences for which Red Notices may not be issued' — interpol.int
- CCF Requests Chamber, decision excerpt no. 7 of 2019 — accuracy, international interest: a petty crime — interpol.int
- CCF Requests Chamber, decision excerpt no. 1 of 2019 — unfunded cheques — interpol.int
- CCF Requests Chamber, decision excerpt no. 5 of 2024 — family matter, seriousness, accuracy — interpol.int
Looking forward to any questions or comments that you may have! My goal is to help you, and your questions and comments are answered within one working day. And if you are somewhere in this story yourself: the assessment is free.
Ask a question or comment