INTERPOL CCF · Article 42 revision

CCF revision after an INTERPOL rejection.

A negative CCF decision is not necessarily the end. We assess newly discovered facts, analyse prior decisions and coordinate evidence-led strategies for a possible revision application.

CCF Refusal Analysis
Article 42 Revision Art. 42
Evidence Review

Request a Confidential Case Assessment How Article 42 works

Independent service. Not affiliated with INTERPOL or the CCF. Outcomes depend on the facts and applicable rules.

Requests Chamber · DecisionExample · request for deletion of data

File

§27The applicant contends that the proceedings against him are politically motivated. The Commission notes the explanation of the National Central Bureau that the criminal proceedings remain active and that a warrant is in force. Still true? Case closed after the decision → new fact

§31The applicant has not provided information demonstrating that refused his extradition on the facts at issue.

§34In the light of the above, the Commission finds that the data comply with INTERPOL's rules.

The request is rejected.

New fact discovered2 Sep 2026Revision window closes 2 Mar 2027

FinalCCF decisions are final and binding on INTERPOL and the applicant. There is no ordinary appeal.Art. 38(1)

6 mo.to apply for revision, counted from the discovery of the new fact, not from the decisionArt. 42(2)

2 pagesfor the initial summary of newly discovered facts in the CCF online portalPortal guide, s. 10.3

1 in 5new admissible CCF requests in 2024 was an application for revision: 18% of 2,586CCF report 2024

Sources: Statute of the CCF; CCF Portal Guidance for Applicants, March 2026; CCF Annual Activity Report 2024, para 55.

Your CCF request was rejected. What comes next?

You may have spent months preparing an application, obtaining legal opinions and responding to requests for information. If the CCF concluded that the challenged data complied with INTERPOL's rules, repeating the same arguments is unlikely to change the result.

A different approach begins with a careful reading of the decision, a chronology of the materials previously available and an evidence-led investigation into what has changed. In some matters a new national court decision, a recently obtained official document or another material development may justify assessing Article 42. In others, the responsible advice is that revision does not appear viable on the facts known today.

We do not sell certainty. We assess whether there is a legally supportable new basis for review.

A CCF revision application is not an appeal

Most people refused by the CCF want to argue the case again. The Statute does not allow that. A revision application asks the Commission to look again only because a fact has come to light that it did not have when it decided.

Ground: The decision was wrong
What you argue: The same facts, better arguments
Who decides: A higher body
Deadline: Runs from the decision
At the CCF: Does not exist. Decisions are final and binding

Ground: A newly discovered fact that could have led to a different conclusion
What you argue: The new fact, why it was not known, and why it matters to the reasoning
Who decides: The CCF Requests Chamber
Deadline: Six months from the discovery of the fact
How you file: The CCF online portal, starting with a two-page summary of the new fact(s)

The three conditions every revision must meet

The CCF considers a revision application only if all three are met. Missing one is usually the end of it, which is why we test them before anything is filed.

1
A newly discovered fact
Something that exists as a fact: a court ruling, a closed case, a document, a status. Legal arguments and opinions about the decision are not facts.
Art. 42(1)
2
It could have changed the conclusion
The fact has to reach the reasoning the CCF actually relied on. A true but marginal fact does not meet this test.
Art. 42(1)
3
Filed within six months of discovery
The clock starts when the fact was discovered. Late filings are generally refused unless there is an appropriate explanation.
Art. 42(2)

What the CCF generally does not accept

Elements that were already known when the Commission examined the case
New elements the Commission does not find likely to change the outcome
Elements known to the applicant and filed after six months, without an appropriate explanation
Applications where the applicant simply disagrees with the decision

Where a new fact might come from

Whether a fact counts depends on what the decision relied on. These are the kinds of facts we most often test against a refusal. None of them works automatically.

A national court decision

Can be material

A later ruling may establish new facts about the investigation, the proceedings or circumstances relevant to data processing. Its significance depends on what it actually says.

The case at home was closed, dropped or ended in acquittal

Can be material

If the decision relied on the requesting country saying proceedings were active, proof that they ended goes to the core of the reasoning.

Previously inaccessible official records

Depends on proof

Prosecution documents, case files or answers from public bodies may reveal material information that was not available during the earlier CCF review.

A reasoned extradition ruling

Depends on proof

Relevant to the overall evidence, especially its findings on political motivation or personal involvement. It does not automatically require the CCF to delete or change INTERPOL data.

Newly established human-rights facts

Depends on proof

A new determination or official finding may warrant analysis. Filing a complaint or obtaining advocacy support does not itself create Article 42 eligibility.

Check your six-month revision window

Enter the date you learned of the new fact. The window counts from that discovery, not from the date of the CCF decision.

Date you discovered the new factExample date shown. Enter yours. Date of the CCF decision Optional. Used to check the order of events.

Orientation only, not a legal deadline. The CCF decides whether an application is on time. The discovery date may need to be proved, and the trigger date should be checked by a qualified adviser.

Six months from discovery–

–

One core service. Several routes to better evidence.

CCF revision is the core. The other services exist because the new fact often sits in another country, another court or another procedure.

Evidence

Independent CCF Refusal Review

A structured examination of the decision, previous submissions, missed questions and potential newly discovered facts.

Learn more →

New Evidence Research & Verification

Define evidence gaps, lawfully obtain records and assess whether new information is material enough for a revision application.

Learn more →

Local Counsel Coordination

Work with qualified lawyers in the relevant jurisdictions to seek lawful access to national court records and procedural information.

Learn more →

Extradition Decision Analysis

Evaluate the findings in national extradition decisions separately from the CCF's data-protection mandate.

Learn more →

Human rights

UN Human Rights Procedure Assessment

Assess whether independent UN mechanisms may be available for a specific alleged violation. No guaranteed UN action or CCF effect.

Learn more →

International Human Rights Advocacy

Prepare accurate briefing materials for independent advocates and researchers, subject to consent and confidentiality.

Learn more →

Strategy

Multi-Jurisdiction Case Strategy

A documented plan that separates CCF revision from national litigation, extradition defence and international communications.

Learn more →

Your refusal is reviewed by an adviser with experience from inside the CCF

A refusal is written in the Commission's own language. Reading it well starts with knowing how those decisions are prepared.

Lead Legal Adviser · INTERPOL and international criminal law

Ahmed Abdelmawgoud

Ahmed has worked inside INTERPOL in Lyon, assessing individual requests and State submissions under INTERPOL's data protection rules, the work at the heart of every CCF case.

Before that he worked with the United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, supported by OHCHR, on open-source investigation of human rights violations. He has also written case reports on international humanitarian and criminal law for Oxford Reports on International Law, published by Oxford University Press.

Reads the decision as it was written: He knows which findings a refusal rests on, and so where a new fact can reach the reasoning and where it cannot.
Anticipates the country's reply: The CCF consults the National Central Bureau on a revision too. We prepare for what it will say about your new fact.
Is clear about limits: The CCF is independent. Experience gives knowledge of its procedure and standards, not access to it, and no one can promise its decision.

INTERPOL and the CCF
United Nations, OHCHR
Oxford Reports on International Law
Article 42 revision
Data protection

How our review works

Understand the decision
Review the negative CCF decision, the case history and any earlier submissions.
Build the evidence chronology
Separate facts known before the decision from information discovered afterwards.
Assess materiality and timing
Examine whether Article 42 may apply, including when the relevant fact became known.
Investigate evidence gaps
Where authorised, coordinate lawful research and qualified local counsel.
Prepare the next-stage strategy
If the threshold appears arguable, plan a concise revision submission under the current portal rules.
Address parallel risks separately
National court, extradition or UN procedures may need their own advice and response.

Confidentiality and independent judgment

These matters involve sensitive personal data, national criminal proceedings and security concerns. Our assessment form asks only for basic status information and safe contact details. Documents are exchanged through a secure process after conflicts and confidentiality arrangements are in place.

A candid conclusion that a revision cannot currently be supported is a legitimate outcome. So is a recommendation to seek urgent local criminal or extradition counsel rather than rely on CCF proceedings alone.

What published CCF decisions can teach applicants

The CCF publishes excerpts of selected anonymised decisions. They are a selection, not a complete database, and they are not our cases. They do show how the Commission reasons about political character, the role of the person and the information a country provides.

CCF sessions and decisions on interpol.int →

Tell us about the refusal. Keep the documents for later.

Five quick questions are enough for a first answer. Personal documents are exchanged only through a secure channel, after we have explained the confidentiality terms. Prefer more detail? Use the full case assessment.

01Has anything new happened since the CCF decision?

New fact Yes Not sure No

02When did you learn about it? Optional

03Are you detained or facing extradition now?

Urgency Yes No

04Your name

05Email, WhatsApp or Telegram

Do not send the decision, names or case numbers here. We send you a secure channel for documents once the confidentiality terms are agreed.

I agree that CIL may use these answers to contact me about my case.

Questions after a CCF refusal

Can I appeal a negative CCF decision?

CCF decisions are final and binding (Article 38(1) of the CCF Statute) and there is no ordinary appeal. Article 42 allows an application for revision, subject to specific requirements concerning newly discovered facts.

Does the six-month period start on the date of the CCF rejection?

Not necessarily. Under Article 42(2) the period runs from the discovery of the fact relied on for revision. The exact factual timeline should be reviewed carefully, and the discovery date may need to be proved.

My Red Notice removal was denied. Can I just file the same request again?

A request that is essentially the same as a previous one and contains no new elements can be declared inadmissible. A new filing makes sense only when something has changed, and part of a review is choosing the right route.

My previous lawyer did not submit an important document. Is that a new fact?

Usually not. Elements that were already known when the Commission examined the case are generally not accepted, even if they were never filed. Where a document existed but could not have been obtained, the facts need careful analysis.

Will a decision refusing extradition automatically remove a Red Notice?

No. National extradition proceedings and CCF review answer different legal questions. A judgment may contain material worth examining, but the result is not automatic.

How is a revision filed now?

Since 26 March 2026, CCF requests go through its dedicated online portal, except where the Commission finds exceptional circumstances. The March 2026 portal guidance describes a two-page summary of the newly discovered fact(s) at the first step; the CCF may ask for further documents later.

How long does the CCF take to decide a revision?

Article 42(3) applies the same timeframes as for the original request: four months for access and nine months for correction or deletion, from admissibility. The CCF can extend them when circumstances justify it.

Can I submit a revision without a lawyer?

Yes. Applicants may use the CCF portal themselves or through an authorised representative. Independent professional support is optional and may help with complex evidence or cross-border issues.

Can a UN complaint reopen my CCF case?

Not by itself. International human-rights procedures have separate mandates. Any new findings must be assessed for their specific factual relevance under Article 42.

I am detained or facing extradition. What should I do first?

Seek immediate advice from a qualified lawyer in the country concerned. A CCF procedure does not stop national proceedings. During CCF proceedings the Commission may decide on provisional measures under Article 37, but that depends on the case. Write to us on WhatsApp as well.

Do you guarantee a positive result?

No. We do not promise deletion, reversal, acceptance, immunity from arrest or any particular outcome. The first step is to assess whether a sound basis exists.

Official sources

Independent summary. These institutions do not endorse this service. Check the live official guidance before filing.

CCF revision after an INTERPOL rejection.

Your CCF request was rejected. What comes next?

A CCF revision application is not an appeal

An appeal

Revision under Article 42

The three conditions every revision must meet

A newly discovered fact

It could have changed the conclusion

Filed within six months of discovery

What the CCF generally does not accept

Where a new fact might come from

A national court decision

The case at home was closed, dropped or ended in acquittal

Previously inaccessible official records

A reasoned extradition ruling

Newly established human-rights facts

Check your six-month revision window

One core service. Several routes to better evidence.

Independent CCF Refusal Review

New Evidence Research & Verification

Local Counsel Coordination

Extradition Decision Analysis

UN Human Rights Procedure Assessment

International Human Rights Advocacy

Multi-Jurisdiction Case Strategy

Your refusal is reviewed by an adviser with experience from inside the CCF

Ahmed Abdelmawgoud

How our review works

Understand the decision

Build the evidence chronology

Assess materiality and timing

Investigate evidence gaps

Prepare the next-stage strategy

Address parallel risks separately

Confidentiality and independent judgment

What published CCF decisions can teach applicants

Tell us about the refusal. Keep the documents for later.

Questions after a CCF refusal

Start with the decision you have