INTERPOL Dismantling Strengthening the Tools of Oppression 76. Clare Rewcastle Brown’s case is an encouraging example that shows that INTERPOL’s review mechanisms can work, but the media coverage in this case must have helped INTERPOL to identify Malaysia’s request for the Red Notice to be politically motivated. Clearly, not all cases benefit from the same degree of publicity that this one had, and it would be hard to describe the NDTF’s review procedures as effective, if it were only able to prevent the dissemination of Red Notices in high profile cases. 77. Since being notified that INTERPOL had taken steps to improve its ability to weed out requests for INTERPOL alerts which are contrary to its rules, we have continued to see cases which suggest that the process is not yet working as effectively as it should. These cases suggest that, whatever the procedures for the review are, there is much room for improvement. In some of these cases, INTERPOL would have been able to find information that suggested that a Red Notice or a Diffusion violated its rules, just by doing a quick internet search: a. Muhiddin Kabiri As the leader of the Islamic Renaissance Party of Tajikistan (“IRPT”) since 2006, Muhiddin Kabiri was a member of Tajikistan’s parliament until the country’s 2015 elections, when the government began a crackdown on political opposition in the country. IRPT was banned, and Kabiri and other members of his party were convicted and sentenced after criminal proceedings which were criticised by human rights activists as being politically motivated.58 But only months after this judgment, Muhiddin’s details were uploaded on to INTERPOL’s list of wanted persons.59 Muhiddin was a prominent member of the IRPT and reports critical of the government’s crackdown on his party were widely available to the public, so the issuance of the Red Notice against him seemed to suggest that INTERPOL had failed to carry out sufficient checks. Muhiddin’s Red Notice was removed in 2018 after Fair Trials notified the CCF of his refugee status. “In June, Tajikistan’s Supreme Court sentenced IRPT leaders to lengthy prison terms on charges of attempting to overthrow the government. The sentences followed an unfair trial initiated in retaliation for their peaceful political opposition and reflect the government’s pervasive manipulation of the justice system and egregious violations of the right to freedom of expression.”60 Human Rights Watch Human Rights Watch, ‘Tajikistan: Severe Crackdown on Political Opposition (17 February 2016), Available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2016/02/17/tajikistan -severe-crackdown-political-opposition 58 The Guardian, ‘Tajikistan human rights fears as banned party’s ex-leaders jailed for life’ (2 June 2016) Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/ jun/02/tajikistan-human-rights-fears-banned-irpt-party-leaders-jailed-life 59 Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, ‘Tajikistan’s Islamic Party Leader Added to Interpol Wanted List’ (5 September 2016) Available at: https://www.rferl.org/a/ tajikistan-islamic-party-chief-interpol-list/27968735.html 60 Human Rights Watch, ‘World Report 2017 – Tajikistan: Events of 2016’, https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/tajikistan 57 35