Texto integral 
Relato integral dos debates
Quarta-feira, 4 de Outubro de 2017 - Estrasburgo Edição revista

18. Mandados de prisão da Interpol (avisos vermelhos) (debate)
Vídeo das intervenções

  President. – The next item is the Council and Commission statements on Interpol arrest warrants (Red Notices) (2017/2873(RSP)).


  Matti Maasikas, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, let me start by underlining that the possible abuse of Interpol Red Notices for political purposes is a matter of great concern to the Council. Following a letter from the German and the Swedish Foreign Ministers to the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini, regarding the arrest of two EU citizens with dual nationality on the basis of Interpol Red Notices, the Presidency decided to address this topic at the joint meeting of the Political and Security Committee and the Standing Committee on Operational Cooperation on Internal Security, on 26 September.

This was just the first step and the Presidency plans to raise the topic again at the half-yearly meeting of the EU Justice and Home Affairs Senior Officials with Interpol on 20 November. We aim to discuss then possible improvements to the existing Interpol systems, and we will listen carefully to Interpol’s plans.

The number of Red Notices has increased over recent years, and they are an extremely useful tool in obtaining the provisional arrest of persons sought for extradition for serious crimes. This was shown by the result of a Commission questionnaire in 2016 regarding Members States’ use of Interpol Red Notices. Over the years, these notices have indeed resulted in the arrests of numerous criminals. Nonetheless, it is important that the proper review should take place before Red Notices are issued, which is a demanding task. It is essential that the rights of our citizens are protected and that an effective redress mechanism exists.

The Presidency is aware that the Interpol general assembly last week, 26-29 September, discussed Red Notices. Interpol has an internal, systematic and proactive review process for vetting the legality of new Red Notices entered into the Interpol database. The Presidency will discuss with Interpol how this process could be speeded up and improved.

The use of Interpol Red Notices for the purpose of obtaining the arrest of persons sought with a view to extradition is not new. The 1957 extradition Convention of the Council of Europe, to which all Member States are parties, as well as Turkey, allows Interpol to be used for transmitting requests for provisional arrest. Whether a Member State accepts an Interpol Red Notice, pending a decision on an extradition request, falls solely within the competence of the Member State.

I would like to emphasise that an Interpol Red Notice will never be the basis for a decision to extradite, as that decision will be the subject of judicial review in a separate judicial procedure. Therefore, there is always a judicial review before a person is extradited. It does not appear feasible to have such a judicial review a priori but, as I have indicated, we will discuss with Interpol on 20 November how to improve the review of Red Notices by Interpol itself.


  Věra Jourová, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, I am aware that Interpol’s Red Notice system has been used for political purposes in some cases. Obviously this is of great concern and it can have a significant impact on the persons involved. The overwhelming majority of Red Notices are genuinely used to seek the arrest of suspects and serious offenders. Exchanging information with Interpol is important in preventing and fighting serious crime. The arrest in Brazil of one of the most wanted Italian mafia criminals is an example of the added value of Interpol Red Notices.

EU Member States are members of Interpol and make use of its Red Notice system. They are, however, not obliged to act upon them. It is for the EU Member States to assess what action they can take when they encounter a Red Notice and to consider such notices carefully in the light of their originating country.

If there are abuses of Interpol’s system, it is for Interpol to put in place the necessary measures to prevent such abuse. As the EU is not a member of Interpol, the Commission cannot directly influence how Interpol puts in place procedures to avoid such misuse. However, the Commission has already, in the past, raised concerns with Interpol about misuse of its instruments. The Commission conducted a number of fact-finding missions and meetings in order to understand the procedures that Interpol has put in place to process personal data. Since February 2015 Interpol has presented a new framework for processing personal data. The processing of notices and ‘diffusions’ against refugees will not be allowed if the status of refugee or asylum seeker has been confirmed. It will also not be allowed if a person fears persecution by the country establishing the notice.

I understand that Interpol has completed the process of reviewing its procedures and tabled a draft resolution to its general assembly last week. The Commission will raise this issue with Interpol as part of its November EU-Interpol senior official meeting. The Commission is ready to provide, as it has done in the past, any support that may be deemed necessary.

As regards the procedures put in place by EU Member States, the Commission gathered information in October 2015 in order to understand how Member States are using Red Notices from Interpol. A large majority of Member States indicated that the upload of Interpol Red Notices into national databases is done only after further examinations and checks. The Commission will continue to follow this important question closely in cooperation with our Member States.

I want to thank the House for your attention and I look forward to fruitful discussion with you.


  Claude Moraes (S&D), on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, we have heard very clearly from the Council and from the Commissioner a very clear recognition of a potential abuse of Interpol Red Notices, and it is refreshing to hear that very clearly. The issue really for us today is to understand what we do about it, and the Council went some way to explaining that mechanism – 20 November, and I want to say more about that in a second.

The Commission also explained some of the limitations to what can be done, and again we must address that today. But let us be very clear what is happening – and again we have support from both the Commission and Council in recognising that these notices and the systems have been abused to – let us be very clear – harass and detain political opponents and dissidents. The countries involved include Russia, China and Iran, let us be very clear. A process to prevent this abuse is needed to resolve the issue, which will become ever more important as databases are increasingly, directly and automatically consulted. This is not an issue that will go away on its own and I respect the honesty of the Council in recognising this. There have been a number of recent examples of abuses of the system in Turkey. After the failed coup in the country last year, we have seen worrying signs that the situation of human rights is deteriorating, and we see this additional problem with the Interpol Red Notices as exacerbating the situation.

We have received reports from journalists who are watching this debate carefully that they are now being harassed, and many others – including the Nobel Peace Prize nominee Can Dündar who is living in exile in Germany and who is currently on trial – are also being affected by this situation. We have heard from Fair Trials International, the Organisation for Security and Co—operation in Europe (OSCE) and others of what we need to do. As Members of the European Parliament, we need not only to speak out whenever there are incidents of political repression, but also to ensure there are safeguards in place to prevent the abuse of Interpol arrest warrants, which are an important tool in ensuring the security of the EU.

My questions then come back to the Commission and Council: can we provide more detail on what has been done to ensure the rights of EU and third—country citizens, and whether there is a better mechanism to ensure that necessity and proportionality checks are carried out on Interpol alerts from certain countries. Could the Commission also provide guidelines on a common response on how best to handle extradition requests from third countries. I understand the limitations and the legal limitations, but I am happy that, in the initial responses from the Council and Commission, there is a clear recognition that we cannot see these potential abuses of Interpol Red Notices happening on our territory; we cannot see these obvious abuses of human rights. We respect our freedom, we are a European Union of values, so let us not see these abuses continue.


  Cornelia Ernst, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Meine Damen und Herren! Weder Interpol noch Staatsanwaltschaften – das muss man klar sagen – dürfen sich zum Büttel von Diktatoren machen. Artikel 3 des Interpolstatuts verbietet ausdrücklich den Missbrauch polizeilicher Fahndung zu politisch-militärisch-religiösen und rassistischen Zwecken und damit auch Verhaftungen, wie sie im Falle des Schriftstellers Doğan Akhanlı stattgefunden haben. Wir fordern deshalb nicht nur, dass Interpol sich einfach an geltendes Recht hält, sondern auch dass alle Datenbanken zu Red Notices überprüft werden, um weiteren Missbrauch zu verhindern.

Wir verlangen insbesondere von den spanischen Behörden, endlich ihre Praxis zu ändern und politisch motivierten Haftgesuchen nicht nachzukommen, wie das übrigens alle anderen Mitgliedstaaten der EU machen – nur Spanien macht das nicht. Nicht nur das Beispiel Akhanlı zeigt, dass da einiges bei Interpol falsch ist, und ob ausgerechnet der neue Chef, einziger Vize-Chef der inneren Sicherheit in China, auf Besserung hoffen lässt, steht in den Sternen, denn China ist doch bekannt dafür, genau mit solchen Haftgesuchen Dissidenten und Flüchtlingen beikommen zu wollen.

Noch einmal: Interpol muss das Gebot von Unabhängigkeit und Neutralität strikt wahren, und dafür sollten wir uns einsetzen.


  Bodil Valero, för Verts/ALE-gruppen. – Fru talman! Jag vill börja med att tacka kommissionen för att jag idag fick svar på den fråga jag ställde under förra plenarsammanträdet. Den handlade om den svenska journalisten Hamza Yalcin med turkisk bakgrund, som ju fängslades i Spanien i väntan på en eventuell utvisning. Vad jag vet idag så har han släppts i väntan på ett slutligt beslut.

Interpol är ju en organisation som tillkommit för, och vars uppgift är, att beivra brott och lagföra brottslingar. Internationellt polissamarbete är nödvändigt och välkommet. Men vi har ett problem när systemet missbrukas i politiskt syfte, och det ser vi ju allt fler exempel på. Det är, precis som har sagts här tidigare, väldigt viktigt att understryka att den här varningen inte är en arresteringsorder och att Interpol vare sig utfärdar arresteringsordrar eller tvingar medlemsstaterna att arrestera en person med ”red notice”.

Varje stat gör sig egen bedömning. Man ska vara särskilt noga när det handlar om personer som har skyddsstatus av någon form. Där skulle jag också vilja understryka att det är viktigt att inte bara de som har fått flyktingförklaring, utan att de som har fått stanna på någon annan skyddsgrund, för det finns ju olika nivåer och under olika tider – åtminstone i den svenska lagstiftningen har vi haft tre, fyra olika artiklar med skyddsgrunder, men det är bara den ena där man får flyktingförklaring enligt FN-systemet, så att säga – så det är viktigt att även de som har fått stanna på andra skyddsgrunder tas särskild hänsyn till.

Det är också oerhört viktigt att medlemsstaterna verkligen trycker på för att Interpol använder sig av det här systemet, så att medlemsstaterna följer det; det skulle jag vilja säga.


  Tim Aker, on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Madam President, it is very noble to criticise the governments in Moscow and Ankara for using arrest warrants to round up political opponents. This would have been very laudable had the events of last weekend in Spain not happened. But one cannot lecture on other governments’ human rights records when this institution and the European Union turn a complete blind eye to what happened in Catalonia last Sunday. The responses that we had from the Commission about dialogue and the rule of law were, frankly, toothless. These were people who were going to put a cross on a bit of paper in a box. They were not calling for armed revolution, they were not trying to impose force on other people. They were expressing an opinion. And here we say to the governments in Moscow and Ankara that expressing an opinion is a human right.

Do not lecture other governments until you get your own house in order. Get tough on Spain because had it been any other government you would use all the powers you have to hold it to account.

(The President cut off the speaker)


  President. – Colleagues, just for information, this is not a debate on Spain. Mr Aker, I really allowed you extra privilege to make your contribution.


  Jaromír Štětina (PPE). – Paní předsedající, Interpol je největší policejní organizace na světě. Sdružuje 192 států. Spolupracuje při pronásledování a zatýkaní pachatelů trestných činů. Interpol musí spolupracovat i se státy nedemokratickými. Právě spolupráce s diktátorskými režimy přináší možnosti zneužívaní Interpolu k vydávání politických protivníků těmto režimům. Mezi státy zneužívající Interpol patří například Rusko, Ázerbájdžán, Kazachstán, Turecko či Moldavsko.

Interpol proto do své konstituce zařadil důležitý článek 3: Je přísně zakázáno konat ve věcech charakteru vojenského, politického, náboženského a rasového. Přesto však řada osob zůstává v hledáčku nedemokratických zemí. I když extradice těchto osob byla zamítnuta, mohou být stále na seznamu hledaných osob, hrozí jim zadržení a pobyt v detenci, nemohou volně cestovat či najít práci.

Interpol se žádostmi nedemokratických vlád zabývá. Například Achmed Zakajev, premiér čečenské republiky Ičkeria, byl zatčen v Dánsku na základě obvinění z terorismu. Až v roce 2003 získal v Británii azyl poté, co byla ruská žádost britskými soudy uznána za politicky motivovanou. V některých případech Interpol žádosti zamítnul. Například v případě Williama Browdera, autora tzv. Magnitského zákona. Interpol na základě článku 3 odmítl i zatčení a extradici 3 poslanců EP, které žádal Ázerbájdžán kvůli tomu, že „protizákonně“ letos navštívili Náhorní Karabach.

Interpol v boji proti zločinu potřebujeme. Proto vítám započatou reformu Interpolu. Interpol by měl přijmout daleko větší pojistky proti zneužívání.


  Bogusław Liberadzki (S&D). – Pani Przewodnicząca! Pani Komisarz! Chciałem, żeby nasza debata w pierwszej kolejności nie prowadziła do osłabienia Interpolu bądź dezorientacji w tym, co ma robić. Mamy czasy takie, jakie mamy, i jest oczekiwanie społeczne, że potrzebna jest po prostu skuteczność w ściganiu wszelkiego rodzaju przestępców. To jest pierwsze – zasadnicze moim zdaniem – przesłanie.

Druga rzecz – Interpol powinien oceniać, kiedy ma podejmować działania i czy mają być to działania do końca skuteczne, kiedy ma ich nie podejmować. Uważam, że debata na temat kryteriów jest ze wszech miar dobra i owocna, a kryteria raz zapisane nie mogą być niezmienne, ponieważ nasze życie, nasza praktyka jest bardzo dynamiczna. W związku z tym jeżeli Interpol ma odpowiadać w każdym momencie potrzebom chwili, ten dialog, te przesłanki, obszary, państwa, kryteria powinny być jednoznacznie określone, debatowane.

Chciałbym także bardzo wyraźnie podkreślić to, o czym mówiła pani komisarz Jourova: procedury odszkodowawcze, naprawianie szkody, jeżeli nastąpiła pomyłka. Pomyłki mogą się zdarzyć i te procedury byłyby ważne. Tak że nasza debata powinna pomóc Interpolowi. Takie jest oczekiwanie, że będzie to nadal skuteczna organizacja.


  Marina Albiol Guzmán (GUE/NGL). – Señora presidenta, Hamza Yalçin, periodista sueco de origen turco ha pasado 56 días en prisión en Barcelona porque el Gobierno de Mariano Rajoy atendió una orden de Interpol que había interpuesto el Gobierno turco: una orden por insultos al presidente, por escribir en una revista no adepta al régimen y por vínculos terroristas por militar en un partido de izquierdas.

El Gobierno de España de Mariano Rajoy ha actuado en complicidad con el régimen autocrático que el presidente Erdogan ha impuesto en Turquía, que mantiene a 163 periodistas encarcelados, ha cerrado 128 medios de comunicación o mantiene en la cárcel a 78 alcaldes y alcaldesas y 13 diputados y diputadas de la izquierda kurda y turca. Pero parece que mientras Turquía colabore con el proyecto xenófobo de esta Europa fortaleza, la Unión Europea está dispuesta a ser cómplice de represión.


  Jiří Pospíšil (PPE). – Paní předsedající, já se chci také připojit k hlasům svých kolegů, kteří zde volají po reformě Interpolu a po reformě červených oznámení. Byla zde zmiňována celá řada případů, kdy např. Turecko zneužívá tohoto institutu k šikanování a postihování disidentů, kteří opustí území Turecka.

Nejsou to jen příklady ve Španělsku, já jsem z České republiky a i v České republice jsme takovýto konkrétní případ měli. Možná je Komisi znám, byla to kauza Nazmiho Sahina, který byl tureckým občanem kurdské národnosti, byl v Turecku odsouzen na šest let za trestní čin napojení na organizaci s politickými zájmy neslučitelnými se státním zřízením Turecka. To znamená, byl to zjevně politický delikt. Nastoupilo tedy červené oznámení, on opustil svoji vlast, přišlo tedy červené oznámení Interpolu a česká justice toto řešila. Česká justice samozřejmě tohoto dotyčného člověka nevydala, ale celé řízení trvalo více než rok a dotyčný Sahin byl zkrátka zadržován, byl omezován na svých právech, byl v zásadě takto nepřímo šikanován a přitom česká justice postupovala zcela podle zákona.

Myslím si, že reformu musí provést sám Interpol, musí být provedena reforma červených oznámení, protože jednotlivé justiční orgány potom zcela podle hmotného práva v dané členské zemi řeší, jak se má postupovat. A i když dotyčný není vydán, tak několikaměsíční šikana je podle mě zcela zbytečná. Ostatně platí to, co říkal jeden z mých předřečníků, i když třeba tento člověk Českou republikou nebyl vydán, tak dál toto červené oznámení platí a on může být zadržen v kterékoliv jiném státě a opět se ten dotyčný může dostat do obtíží. To znamená je v zásadě permanentně šikanován. Takže také volám po reformě červených oznámeních.


  Juan Fernando López Aguilar (S&D). – Señora presidenta, comisaria Jourová, este es un debate que no solamente es oportuno, es un debate necesario, porque el sistema de Red Notices —«informaciones rojas»— de Interpol ha dado lugar no solamente a disfunciones, sino claramente a abusos políticos intolerables. Por ejemplo, en mi propio país, como aquí se ha señalado, en el verano de 2017, un ciudadano turco-sueco y un ciudadano germano-turco fueron los dos objeto de reprobables expedientes de extradición, sobre la base clarísima de persecución política.

Y el Consejo de Europa ya ha advertido, como lo ha hecho la Asamblea Parlamentaria en una Resolución de 2017, de la necesidad de impedir que países con un historial infame en materia de derechos humanos puedan valerse de Interpol para perseguir a sus oponentes.

Es importante que la Comisión aclare a este Parlamento que es lo que piensa hacer para asegurarse de que esta distorsión no pueda tener lugar, de que el sistema esté sometido a todos los controles de fundamentación de los expedientes de extradición para que no puedan ser objeto de violaciones o de abusos de los derechos humanos, de usos inadmisibles, y, en particular, en el sistema de intercambio de información a través del SIS de segunda generación, a través de SEIAV, a través del Sistema de Entradas y Salidas y del intercambio de información entre los sistemas de los Estados miembros e Interpol.

Y por eso es importante que la Comisión clarifique qué medida piensa adoptar para extremar el rigor, para impedir que pueda ejercerse un mandato de privación de libertad o un abuso sobre los derechos fundamentales de las personas a través de las notificaciones de Interpol.


Catch-the-eye procedure


  José Inácio Faria (PPE). – Senhora Presidente, Senhora Comissária, caros Colegas, a Assembleia Parlamentar do Conselho da Europa aprovou em massa a Resolução 2161, intitulada Abusive recourse to the Interpol system: the need for more stringent legal safeguards. A Interpol é um instrumento eficiente de cooperação internacional na luta contra a criminalidade transnacional, incluindo o terrorismo, e baseia-se na assistência mútua entre as autoridades nacionais de aplicação da lei e deve funcionar em total neutralidade e com respeito pelos direitos humanos dos suspeitos.

O processo de globalização abriu diversos canais de atividade criminosa transnacional. As ameaças são hoje complexas, numerosas e desestabilizantes, pelo que a colaboração internacional entre polícias e entidades judiciárias é a resposta à internacionalização do crime. O alerta internacional permite que a polícia dos Países-membros partilhe informações críticas relativas a crimes ocorridos, designadamente, o alerta vermelho. Dados disponíveis dizem-nos que, na última década, o número de alertas vermelhos emitidos aumentou drasticamente.

Senhora Comissária, penso que tudo isto é possível desde que haja respeito pelos direitos humanos e pelo primado do Estado de direito.


  Nicola Caputo (S&D). – Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, gli avvisi rossi dell'Interpol costituiscono una richiesta di cooperazione internazionale delle autorità investigative in materia penale per localizzare e arrestare, o comunque limitare la libertà di movimento, di soggetti nel territorio di un altro Stato.

Sul tema degli avvisi rossi sono noti casi di utilizzo improprio da parte di alcuni paesi, anche per reprimere libertà individuali e per perseguire scopi politici. Secondo un rapporto della ONG Fair Trials, c'è stato un aumento significativo degli avvisi rossi provenienti da paesi in cui le libertà fondamentali sono meno tutelate e anche in rapporto alla base di una risoluzione del Consiglio d'Europa evidenzia una crescita consistente degli avvisi rossi negli ultimi anni, con oltre 12000 avvisi emessi solo nel 2016.

Occorre vigilare maggiormente sul corretto utilizzo degli avvisi rossi, garantendo che i diritti dei cittadini dell'Unione europea e dei paesi terzi non siano violati mediante l'uso di dati Interpol da parte degli Stati membri e che la Commissione adotti misure di salvaguardia contro gli abusi in materia di controlli alle frontiere esterne e di utilizzo di sistemi d'informazione.


  Νότης Μαριάς (ECR). – Κυρία Πρόεδρε, ο ρόλος της Interpol είναι πράγματι σημαντικός και για την αντιμετώπιση της παγκόσμιας εγκληματικότητας και για την αντιμετώπιση της τρομοκρατίας. Βεβαίως η Ιnterpol δεν μπορεί να είναι κράτος εν κράτει. Πρέπει να υπάρχει έλεγχος. Πρέπει κατά τη δραστηριότητά της να σέβεται τις θεμελιώδεις ελευθερίες και τα προσωπικά δεδομένα.

Στο ψήφισμα του Συμβουλίου της Ευρώπης, όπως ελέχθη, αναφέρεται σαφώς ότι στο θέμα των κόκκινων σημάτων γίνεται κατάχρηση, διότι μια σειρά χώρες εκδίδουν, για πολιτικούς λόγους, κόκκινο σήμα και, εν συνεχεία, πολλοί άνθρωποι, οι οποίοι είναι ακτιβιστές, φυλακίζονται και παραμένουν, ενδεχόμενα, στις φυλακές για αρκετό διάστημα ή και γίνεται έκδοση. Πρέπει, επομένως, να εξετάσουμε υπό ποιους όρους μπορεί και ο ενδιαφερόμενος να παρέμβει και να προσφύγει κατά του κόκκινου σήματος.

Τέλος, εγώ θα ήθελα να συνεργαστεί η Interpol πολύ πιο στενά με τις ευρωπαϊκές αρχές στην αντιμετώπιση των τζιχαντιστών, οι οποίοι αποτελούν κίνδυνο για την κοινωνία μας.


  Julie Ward (S&D). – Madam President, I think we all agree that Interpol and police co—operation across borders are extremely important for our security. However, when the Interpol system is abused by undemocratic regimes to silence and persecute legitimate voices and human rights defenders, we must all be deeply concerned. The exiled Turkish journalist, Can Dündar, is now facing a Red Notice request in Germany after the Turkish Government submitted a request, accusing him of propaganda. He is one of an increasing number of individuals facing this type of persecution from afar.

The Kazakh Government is another serial abuser of the Red Notice system, with more and more dissidents and opposition leaders being targeted or simply being unfortunate innocent bystanders. Although Interpol does respond to requests to review its decisions, we need much more robust guarantees and serious safeguards and we need accountability for decisions that put human rights at risk.


(End of catch-the-eye procedure)


  Věra Jourová, Member of the Commission. – Madam President, thank you very much for this interesting debate. Interpol Red Notices are a useful tool to seek the arrest of suspects and serious offenders. It is first and foremost for Interpol and its member countries to address weaknesses in the system. It is for EU Member States to assess what action they take when they encounter a Red Notice and to carefully consider such notices in light of their originating country.

Let me assure you that the Commission has followed and continues to follow this issue very closely. The Commission monitors in particular compliance by Member States with the principle of non-refoulement enshrined in EU law. This is to make sure that refugees are not returned if there is a risk of persecution.


  Matti Maasikas, President-in-Office of the Council. – Madam President, I would like to thank all the speakers, in particular Mr Moraes for the very pertinent questions about the situation. Indeed, we are in the situation where the EU Member States are members of another international organisation where there is no clear agreed common EU line or policy.

At the recent meeting of the Political Security Committee and the Committee on Operational Cooperation on Internal Security (COSI), ideas were floated to address this situation. There were those who emphasised a need for a common approach, a need to share best practices. The Estonian Presidency invited all Member States to provide their ideas and to take this discussion further, even before the 20 November meeting with Interpol, to give ammunition to the Presidency at this meeting.

We are committed to keeping this important topic on the agenda and we will of course ask Interpol about its plans on how to improve the review of the notices – because that is one of the main issues, the way that Interpol a priori reviews those Red Notices – and we may also expect requests by Interpol to provide more resources for them to do so. So the topic is on the agenda and discussions will be taken further.


  President. – The debate is closed.

Written statements (Rule 162)


  Javier Couso Permuy (GUE/NGL), por escrito. – Muchas cosas no funcionan en Interpol. Interpol no puede ser usada con objetivos políticos, como una mera herramienta al servicio de los gobiernos represivos, sino que debe mantener sus normas de neutralidad, y ser usada para compartir información que permita detener a criminales reales, y no a periodistas díscolos. Interpol debe ser un mecanismo útil para compartir información, algo muy necesario y que se ha revelado insuficiente estos últimos años, con los ataques terroristas de Barcelona, París o Bruselas. Es inaceptable que en algunos países se haga un uso indebido del sistema de notificaciones rojas de Interpol con el único fin de reprimir la libertad de expresión o perseguir a opositores políticos. El Reglamento de Interpol en su artículo 3 es claro: prohíbe que se investigue a personas por motivos de raza, religión, etc. pero sabemos que esto no se cumple. Turquía utiliza las notificaciones rojas de Interpol de forma sistemática para perseguir a personas por motivos políticos. ¿Hasta cuándo seguiremos considerando al régimen autoritario de Erdogan como socio prioritario de la UE? Hasta que las cosas no cambien, no nos cansaremos de hacer esta pregunta.



Aviso legal - Política de privacidade