As in the previous post in this series, today’s post will discuss the most recent annual activity report of the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files(CCF), which has recently become available after the 90th annual General Assembly. The CCF issues an annual report in conjunction with each General Assembly, and the report typically includes a summary of the activities of the supervisory and advisory chamber as well as the activity of the request chamber.
But before we delve further into the report itself, it is worthwhile to take a moment to understand its source- the CCF- and the CCF’s reason for being.
The mission of the CCF
The CCF is the body within INTERPOL that is responsible for overseeing INTERPOL’s databases system. It determines whether certain information, such as Red Notices, diffusions, and other types of notices, should be included INTERPOL’s databases. The CCF may decide to delete the data, add an addendum to a Red Notice, or make other changes to notices in order to correct them.
Relief sought by data subjects
People seeking assistance from the CCF most often submit requests for
- Access, which concerns the access to information potentially held by INTERPOL’s information system. The CCF will generally disclose the information requested pending a consultation with the data source.
- Correction/deletion, which is a request for the correction or deletion of information potentially being processed in INTERPOL’s files.
- Revision, which is a request to revise a previous decision made by the Commission. The CCF will review new relevant information relating to the former decision in addition to a list of reasons why the current information grants the need to revise the previous decision.
Thus, the CCF’s annual report normally reflects the results of the Commission’s actions regarding those types of requests, as well as its other activity.
In terms of requests, in the last post we discussed the report’s statement that the Commission received 1,417 new requests or applications for revision of a previous Commission decision, concerning 1,665 new applicants. This means that the Commission considered the requests of 1,665 people to either access their files or to make changes in its databases regarding their files.
In the next post, we’ll address the Commission’s report regarding requests for access and revision, and the startlingly common reason that those requests are denied.
As always, thoughts and comments are welcomed.