Refugee Threatened with Interpol Red Notice

November 25 2011

Benny Wenda (a British father of 6 living in Oxford) is being threatened by an Interpol “red notice” which places him at risk of arrest and extradition, prevents him leaving the UK and has branded him a criminal. Nearly ten years ago, Benny was given asylum in the UK after he fled Indonesia where he had suffered torture, death threats and politically-motivated charges due to his peaceful political activities against the oppressive government. Despite Indonesia’s history of persecuting Benny, Interpol (the international police organisation) has listed a global “wanted poster” on its behalf, requesting Benny’s arrest and extradition to Indonesia to face the politically motivated charges that formed the basis of his refugee claim.

Jago Russell, Chief Executive of Fair Trials International, said:

“Benny Wenda has travelled half way around the world to escape persecution but he continues to be threatened from afar for by Indonesia. Interpol must remove the politically-motivated red notice against Benny and improve its accountability mechanisms so that it can live up to its stated commitment to political neutrality and human rights.”

Interpol is the 2nd largest international organisation after the United Nations and, in 2010, issued 6,000 red notices requesting arrest and extradition. The result of a red notice is that the person in question is subject to limits on their movement, their ability to open bank accounts, damage to their reputation, and, in the worst cases, wrongful arrest and extradition. While these notices play an important role in the fight against crime, there are no effective procedures to ensure that these notices are not abused by repressive regimes. There is not, for example, any court or tribunal in which Interpol can be held accountable.

For more information please contact Fair Trials International on +44 (0)20 7822 2370 or +44 (0)7950 849 851

---

Notes to Editors

Background to Benny’s Case: 

• Benny Wenda leads an international campaign for the independence of West Papua from Indonesia. West Papua, Benny’s homeland, is made up of the western part of the peninsula of the island of New Guinea, and is considered part of Indonesia. However, many West Papuans believe they should be independent from Indonesia. 

• Due to his activities Benny was persecuted by the Indonesian government, subjected to torture and to a politically-motivated prosecution. In 2002 Indonesia arrested, detained and prosecuted Benny for “incitement to violence,” accusing him of encouraging others to attack a police station. Benny says he had nothing to do with this, and was in fact in exile in Papua New Guinea at the time of the alleged events. His defence team says that no witnesses appeared at trial to testify to the government’s case. After credible death threats in detention, Benny was forced to escape to the UK.

• Benny was granted asylum in the UK in 2002. Benny is now a British citizen and lives with his wife and six children in Oxford. He has continued his activism on behalf of his West Papuan community, and has formed the Free West Papua Movement, International Parliamentarians for West Papua (consisting of MPs from the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and the Netherlands among others) and International Lawyers for West Papua. 

• You can read a full summary of Benny's case, as well as a downloadable detailed 'spotlight', here. 

The Red Notice against Benny 

• Benny became aware of the red notice against him in 2011, while checking his online profile. The red notice means that anyone can see Indonesia’s allegations against Benny, undermining his credibility as an activist. It also keeps him from travelling for campaign events, as he could be arrested whenever he crosses a border, and potentially returned to Indonesia. This severely limits his ability to campaign for West Papua around the world – exactly, he believes, what Indonesia intends. To see the red notice on the online register click here.

Interpol

• Interpol is an association, based in Lyon, France, which facilitates cooperation between national police forces. It has a membership of 190 countries and is open to dictatorship and democracy alike. It is the second largest global entity after the United Nations. It has a budget of over €59 million. Interpol’s constitution prohibits it from activity that does not fall “in the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights” as well as from involvement in “all matters having a political, religious, or racial character.”

• Interpol is best known for issuing ‘red notices’. A red notice is an alert requested by a member state indicating that it seeks an individual’s provisional arrest. Once a notice is disseminated, other members can choose to act, or not act, on that notice. However, many countries automatically arrest and extradite anyone with a red notice. Even if one country decides not to arrest someone subject to a red notice, travel across international borders is usually impossible, due to the risk that an arrest will happen at an airport or other international border. Even if a state decides not to extradite a subject after arrest on a red notice, an individual can spend weeks or months in detention awaiting the outcome of such a decision. A red notice can have other consequences. Subjects’ bank accounts may be frozen or closed, or they may find it impossible to open a new account, to obtain or keep employment, or to apply for loans and other lines of credit because of the existence of the red notice alone. Red notices are growing in popularity: over 6,000 were issued in 2010.

Accountability for Interpol

• Despite the major human impact of red notices, there is no independent court in which a person can challenge a notice against them. Domestic courts have historically refused to adjudicate claims against Interpol, and many have granted it formal immunity from claims. No international or administrative court has jurisdiction over its actions.

• Individuals subject to a red notice can only challenge it via an internal Committee which is part of Interpol called the “Committee for the Control of Interpol’s Files”. However, the Committee only reviews cases if asked to by the subject of the notice, often after they have already been arrested and detained as a result of the notice. The Committee’s decisions are also non-binding and can be overturned by Interpol’s members. There is no transparent process, public hearing, or mode of appeal.

• Fair Trials International is calling for Interpol to remove Benny’s warrant from their databases, and to reform their practices to better ensure that members cannot abuse red notices to persecute individuals. For more information on FTI’s concerns about Interpol and other cases of injustice click here.