Red Notices in Immigration Court: Engaging with INTERPOL Experts  

By Gianna Borroto and Dr. Ted R. Bromund

For most of the general public, understanding of INTERPOL notices and diffusions comes only from their dramatic portrayal in movies and television. Those portrayals depict INTERPOL as a global police force with squad cars, secret agents, and binding international arrest warrants.

In fact, as explained earlier in this series, INTERPOL functions more like a digital communications platform for member states, relying on a presumption of state legitimacy rather than independently verifying criminal allegations. When a client in removal proceedings is subject to an active INTERPOL Red Notice, correcting these fundamental misunderstandings is essential to winning protection or release from detention. A qualified INTERPOL expert can provide the court with the specialized testimony, analysis, and technical framework needed to dispel preexisting myths about Red Notices and support the client’s underlying claim.

Specifically, for clients in removal proceedings, INTERPOL experts can provide support in five key areas:

  1. Explaining to the court how the INTERPOL system works and what Red Notices do (and do not) prove: the value of this explanation to judges who may never have encountered a Red Notice should not be underestimated. Being an INTERPOL expert witness is very much about educating the court.
  2. In the context of an immigration bond hearing, explaining whether a Red Notice demonstrates that the client is a flight risk or danger to the community. The same is true in habeas proceedings, where an expert can highlight fundamental flaws in an immigration judge’s decision to deny bond based solely on a Red Notice.
  3. Reviewing the Red Notice itself, and discussing any defects or violations it contains, both on its face and as compared to the underlying arrest warrant (if available).
  4. Speaking to patterns of abuse by the requesting country and discussing whether, or how, those patterns are reflected in the case at hand.
  5. If the client’s counsel has succeeded in having the Red Notice provisionally blocked, or deleted, by the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files (CCF), INTERPOL’s appellate body, the expert can explain the meaning of these measures.
Identifying and Retaining an Expert:

For practitioners experienced in asylum cases before the immigration courts, finding an INTERPOL expert is much like locating a country conditions expert. Practitioners may begin their search by reviewing academic faculty directories at universities and published content from scholars who frequently author declarations, blogs, or scholarly articles on INTERPOL abuse and transnational repression. Consulting with law firms with highly specialized INTERPOL defense practices, such as Grossman Young & Hammond, can also be useful, as they often have an established network of vetted expert witnesses.

Typically, INTERPOL experts have prior experience working as:

  • Former INTERPOL Officials & CCF Practitioners: Former legal counsel or Secretariat officers from INTERPOL Headquarters in Lyon, France, as well as attorneys who regularly appear before the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files (CCF).
  • International Human Rights or International Relations Scholars: Law professors, current and former members of international human rights bodies, and researchers specializing in public international law, extradition, transnational repression, and state abuse of INTERPOL’s channels.
  • Former National Central Bureau (NCB) Liaisons: Retired high-ranking law enforcement officers or legal advisors who served within a member country’s NCB and understand the NCB’s internal operations and potential misuse of INTERPOL’s channels.
  • Country Conditions Specialists: Experts who can connect the issuance of a Red Notice to documented patterns of judicial corruption, political persecution, or systemic human rights violations in the issuing country.
Reviewing the Record and Drafting the Expert Report

After an expert has been located and engaged, the first step is usually for the expert to draft a report for submission to the court. This will normally be done on the basis of the written record, though in emergencies – for example, if an expert is engaged at the last minute to testify in a bond hearing – it may be necessary for the expert to work on the basis of knowledge about the INTERPOL system and about what a Red Notice proves and does not prove.

It is generally unwise for an expert to meet with the client in the course of – or after – drafting the written report: DHS attorneys will often ask if the expert has any personal relationship with or knowledge of the client, and it is simplest to be able to reply honestly in the negative.

While the expert should know what documents to request from the attorney, it is useful for attorneys to understand what documents are the most helpful. Obviously, in a case involving INTERPOL, the Red Notice (or other INTERPOL communication, such as a Blue Notice) is key (though in many cases, the client may not have a copy of the notice or diffusion). A factual narrative, which can include the client’s asylum declaration, Request for Deletion before the CCF, or a summary prepared by counsel is also critical, particularly in cases where the Red Notice is unavailable.  

If the client is detained, the arrest warrant from the nation that requested the Red Notice can be helpful in determining if the Red Notice accurately reflects the underlying charge: if DHS cannot provide the warrant, this raises serious questions about whether the client has been detained solely on the basis of a Red Notice. In detained cases, Form I-213 can also provide helpful information on ICE’s decision to detain the client.

If the client has filed for asylum, Form I-589 and any narrative submitted with it can assist the expert in responding to allegations from DHS that the Red Notice is proof that the asylum seeker committed a serious non-political offense abroad. Additionally, if an immigration judge (IJ) has already ruled on any aspect of the case – including denying bond – or if a DHS attorney has characterized the Red Notice in any way, the expert should be provided with these rulings or statements, which may help the expert understand how best to educate the court about INTERPOL and its Notice system.

Indeed, the role of the expert is to educate the court, not to act as a second (and unqualified) defense attorney. Thus, while experts should be willing to consider and respond to attorney reactions to a draft submission, the expert is solely responsible for the accuracy of the submission, and for sustaining it against any DHS cross-examination. It is important for experts not to reach beyond their expertise, and for attorneys not to ask them to do so. For example, an INTERPOL expert should be well-acquainted with patterns of INTERPOL abuse and should be able to demonstrate – for example – that Russia is a notorious abuser of the INTERPOL system. But it would not be wise to ask that same expert to testify to the workings of the Russian legal system, which is the province of a country conditions expert.

The line between country conditions and INTERPOL expertise is not always easy to define. The same is true of legal terminology: it is difficult to write about INTERPOL issues without making some reference to legal concepts (such as “innocent until proven guilty”), but INTERPOL experts are not usually trained in U.S. immigration law. Attorneys at law firms such as GYH, with specialized U.S. immigration and INTERPOL defense practices are an exception. Different attorneys and experts will draw these lines somewhat differently – but the line must be drawn and maintained consistently depending on the expert’s qualifications.

Preparing for the Hearing

Before any hearing, the attorney and the expert should discuss the questions the attorney will ask of the expert. The attorney may well know whether a particular judge has more or less patience with lots of questions, or long-winded experts, while the expert may be able to assist the attorney in picking out points that are especially important to emphasize in testimony, and in avoiding terminology that may have undesirable implications (such as, for example, describing a Red Notice as “evidence” that is relevant to probable cause.)

As with any expert, it can be helpful for the attorney and expert to conduct a practice session, where the attorney conducts a mock direct and cross examination of the expert. Cross examination by DHS can be extremely searching, or it can be limited or non-existent. A common line of questioning aims to imply that, whatever the defects of a given Red Notice may be, those defects do not prove that the individual in question did not commit the alleged offense. INTERPOL experts do not typically have the expertise to engage in these arguments, which should be left to immigration counsel to address.

Qualifying the INTERPOL Expert in Immigration Court

According to the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA), an expert is “someone who ‘is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.’” Matter of J-G-T-, 28 I&N Dec. 97, 100-101 (BIA 2020) (internal citations omitted). Therefore, at the beginning of the hearing, the expert will need to be qualified by the IJ. This process can be quick, or it can be drawn out, depending on the persistence of the DHS attorney and the patience of the judge. The expert must be prepared for a searching review of credentials, prior experience, basis of expertise, and relationship with the client. It is crucial to submit a copy of the expert’s curriculum vitae or resume with the expert report to demonstrate the expert’s qualifications and expertise in INTERPOL matters.

DHS counsel may engage in voir dire to question the expert’s qualifications. Questioning typically focuses on the expert’s background and any potential biases. DHS attorneys will also generally ask if the expert has been or expects to be paid. The expert, who is placed under oath, must be completely honest during this process.

When assessing whether to admit expert testimony, the IJ “should consider whether it is sufficiently relevant and reliable for the expert to offer an informed opinion.” J-G-T-, 28 I&N Dec. 97 at 101 (internal citations omitted). For an INTERPOL expert, providing a reasoned explanation as to why a particular notice violates INTERPOL’s governing Constitution and Rules, how the requesting country is a known violator of INTERPOL’s channels, and/or how a notice fails to meet evidentiary thresholds is key to meeting this threshold.

Once the INTERPOL expert’s testimony is admitted, the IJ must decide how to weigh it. To be given full weight and consideration, the testimony must be “probative and persuasive regarding the key issues in dispute in the case.” Id. at 103. This requires analyzing whether the expert’s conclusions are anchored in a reliable factual and evidentiary foundation rather than speculation.  With a strong expert report, a CV clearly highlighting the expert’s experience on INTERPOL matters, and a well-prepared expert, practitioners can ensure that the court understands the realities of a Red Notice, ultimately giving the client the best possible foundation to challenge removal or detention. 

Conclusion

INTERPOL is its own world, with its own concepts, procedures, and systems. Like many specialized areas, it is easily misunderstood, and it has additionally suffered from pervasive mischaracterization by Hollywood. In removal proceedings, an INTERPOL expert witness can be critical in dispelling the misunderstandings that are rife about INTERPOL, and assist the attorney, and ultimately the client, by educating the court about the use, abuse, value, and limits of the INTERPOL system.

This is Part Nine of our series on handling INTERPOL Red Notices in U.S. immigration court. Stay tuned for our last installment next week, where we will discuss engaging INTERPOL experts to identify patterns of misuse and misconduct, provide country-specific context, and strengthen challenges to Red Notices in immigration court and before the CCF.

www.grossmanyoung.com  |  info@grossmanyoung.com  |  (240) 403-0913  |  (301) 917-6900

*Disclaimer: This information is presented for the purposes of general education and does not constitute legal advice.