The Facts
The Applicant is a dual national of Ukraine and Austria, and he is an owner of a company.
In 2011 the Russian State Company transferred more than 17 million US dollars to companies of our Client for delivering equipment. However, the equipment was not delivered in full for reasons that did not depend upon the will of our Client but related to other contractors.
However, the Applicant was accused of fraudulent misappropriation of funds from the Russian budget and was put on the international wanted list in 2020.
On 08 April 2022, the Applicant was arrested in Hungary based on Interpol’s diffusion. He was subject to restrictive measures pending the extradition proceedings. On 11 April 2022, the Hungarian Metropolitan Law Court issued a decision denying Applicant’s extradition on the basis that the conditions for extradition had not been met because the statutory limitations for the crime under Hungarian law expired.
The Commission’s findings
First of all, the Commission establishes that Russia did not adequately explain the absence of efforts by its authorities to pursue the purpose of the diffusion vis-à-vis their Austrian counterparts, given how his location in Austria is officially declared by the Russian authorities. Therefore, the Commission expressed some doubts about the active interest of the Russian authorities to achieve the purpose of the data in the meaning of Articles 10 and 97 (1) of the RPD.
The Commission analyzed the availability of elements to describe the individual criminal involvement of the Applicant.
The Commission, in its analysis of the tangible elements available to describe the link between the Applicant and the underlying facts, has established that the Applicant’s signing of the contract appears to be the sole conduct imputed to him in an individual capacity without grouping his involvement to that of his accomplices, which does not, in itself, amount to a sufficient link to a criminal conspiracy.
The Extradition Lawyers arguments
Extradition Lawyers requested the deletion of the data concerning the Applicant contending, in essence, that:
- there is a lack of clarity regarding the purpose of processing the data;
- the case relates to a private dispute that is not of interest for the purposes of international police cooperation; and
- the data lack a succinct and clear description of the Applicant’s alleged criminal involvement.
The Outcome (decision of the CCF)
The Commission decides that the data concerning the Applicant are not compliant with Interpol’s rules applicable to the processing of personal data, and that they shall be deleted from Interpol’s files.
