The short answer. Not lawfully. INTERPOL's data rules state that Red Notices "may not be published for offences relating to private matters and for offences originating from a violation of laws or regulations of an administrative nature or deriving from private disputes," unless the conduct is aimed at facilitating a serious crime or is linked to organised crime. Yet disputes between business partners, employers and executives, or spouses still produce notices — because a private dispute can be dressed as a crime.
The rule is clear. The difficulty is that a Red Notice never says “private dispute”. It says “fraud”.
Where the rule comes from
Article 83 of INTERPOL’s Rules on the Processing of Data sets the conditions for a Red Notice: a serious ordinary-law crime above a penalty threshold, with three categories excluded outright — offences that turn on behavioural or cultural norms, family or private matters, and offences “deriving from private disputes”. The Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files quotes that wording in its published decisions; INTERPOL’s task force applies it before publication.
How a private dispute becomes a criminal complaint
In many countries a complaint starts a criminal case, and a prosecutor may charge before any court has tested the story. A commercial counterparty, a former employer or a relative with money at stake can obtain a warrant, and the warrant can become a Red Notice. Nothing in the notice reveals that a civil claim over the same facts is running in parallel, that the complainant is the opponent in it, or that the timing follows the civil calendar.
The test is not what the charge is called. It is what the dispute is really about — and who benefits from the arrest.
What the CCF looks for
Because the Commission cannot retry the facts, it reads the record around them. What persuades it is documentary: the civil proceedings between the same parties; the sequence of dates; contracts and correspondence showing a commercial relationship gone wrong; findings by any court that has examined the matter; and the requesting country’s own file, obtained when the Commission consults the source. Where the conduct alleged is, in substance, a debt, a contractual breach or a corporate falling-out, the notice fails Article 83 whatever its label — and where the prosecution also serves a political purpose, Article 3 of the Constitution is engaged too. The grounds are set out in Which INTERPOL rules get a Red Notice deleted?
Why it matters so much
A person facing a civil claim can defend it in court. A person facing a Red Notice over the same facts may be arrested at an airport, lose their bank accounts and be unable to reach the very hearing where they would defend themselves. That asymmetry is what Article 83 exists to prevent — and INTERPOL’s own figures, 2,550 Red Notices and diffusions refused or cancelled in 2025, show how often the front door must close.
Related
- Which INTERPOL rules get a Red Notice deleted?
- What is an INTERPOL Red Notice?
- Do I need a lawyer to challenge a Red Notice?
- INTERPOL's Rules on the Processing of Data, Article 83 — interpol.int
- Constitution of INTERPOL, Articles 2 and 3 — interpol.int
- CCF Requests Chamber, decision excerpt no. 9 of 2019, quoting Article 83 on private matters — interpol.int
- INTERPOL — notice statistics, December 2025: refusals and cancellations by ground, 2017–2025 (Compliance and review, — interpol.int
- CCF Annual Activity Report 2024 — 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