Otherside is an INTERPOL-only law firm, founded by a former Legal Officer at the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files. Six years inside the CCF, now representing clients before it. Red Notice removal, diffusion challenges, urgent provisional measures, and applications for revision under Article 42.
Otherside is a boutique practice focused exclusively on INTERPOL notices and proceedings before the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files (CCF), including Red Notice removal. The firm was founded by a Former Legal Officer with six years' experience at the CCF, the body responsible for reviewing requests to access or delete data recorded in INTERPOL's files. As an INTERPOL law firm, Otherside works across CCF proceedings including access requests, deletion requests, and requests for provisional measures.
Written submissions to the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files. Every matter is assessed against INTERPOL rules to identify the strongest grounds and prepare a clear, evidence-based request for deletion.
Confirm whether your personal data is recorded in INTERPOL's information system, and address restrictions imposed by National Central Bureaus.
Urgent requests for provisional measures while the deletion request is examined. Immediate protection against the practical effects of a notice.
Action filed in advance to reduce the risk of publication of a future Red Notice, especially where abuse or political motivation is in play.
Revision under Article 42 of the CCF Statute, presenting newly discovered, relevant facts and supporting material.
Discreet support for firms handling INTERPOL and CCF matters: strategy input, procedural review, drafting support for complex cases. Co-counsel arrangements available.
IS BUILT ON 
PRIOR EXPERIENCE WITHIN 
THE CCFWe focus exclusively on INTERPOL and CCF matters, representing individuals in Red Notice removal and related CCF proceedings. Every engagement at the firm involves INTERPOL law.
The founder's prior experience within the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files gives a clear understanding of how requests are assessed in practice, and how to build submissions aligned with CCF procedure and decision practice.
We assist clients worldwide, including business executives, entrepreneurs, politically exposed persons (PEPs), and individuals with refugee or asylum status, in challenging unjust INTERPOL notices and diffusions.
Fees are fixed in writing before the engagement letter is signed. Hourly billing applies only in narrow situations where a fixed fee cannot reasonably be set. No open-ended estimates, no surprise invoices.
Selected anonymised outcomes obtained by Otherside before the CCF, including temporary blocking and deletion decisions. Concrete results, redacted to protect client confidentiality.
View case results
Charlie Magri, a lawyer admitted to the Marseille Bar, France, is the founder of Otherside and represents clients worldwide before the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files (CCF). As an INTERPOL lawyer, he has deep knowledge of INTERPOL's rules and procedures and extensive experience challenging Red Notices before the CCF. Before founding Otherside, he served for six years as a Legal Officer within the CCF Secretariat, the independent body that examines requests to access, correct, or delete data recorded in INTERPOL's files.
This background provides a precise understanding of INTERPOL's internal workings and individual remedies. It now underpins his practice, representing clients worldwide in Red Notice removal and other CCF proceedings.
Learn more about Charlie MagriOur experience covers a wide range of INTERPOL-related issues. At Otherside, we represent clients in complex matters before the CCF, addressing legal, procedural, and human rights aspects of INTERPOL Red Notices and diffusions.
We apply INTERPOL's predominance test to show when a Red Notice or diffusion is driven by political motives, often in matters involving opposition figures, activists, journalists, or politically exposed persons.
Red Notices arising from private or commercial disputes, including contractual disagreements later reframed as fraud, affecting entrepreneurs, executives, and cross-border business conflicts.
Cases where the underlying proceedings or likely consequences raise serious human rights issues, including credible risks of arbitrary detention, discriminatory treatment, or fair trial failures.
For clients with refugee or asylum status, we act where INTERPOL processing conflicts with the Refugee Resolution and international protection principles.
Cases involving inaccurate or outdated data in INTERPOL's databases. Article 12 RPD requires data to be accurate, relevant, and up to date.
Notices that fail to meet INTERPOL's publication requirements, including missing judicial documentation, unclear legal basis, or insufficient description of the alleged conduct.
Cases where a person is pursued more than once for the same facts, including after an acquittal, final dismissal, or completed sentence, yet a notice remains in place.
Parental child abduction and international custody disputes, applying the CCF's practice to challenge data recorded in violation of INTERPOL standards.
The INTERPOL Notice Removal Check identifies which of the 17 legal grounds for removal may apply to your case. Written report by email.
A curated set of free resources for individuals, lawyers, and companies dealing with INTERPOL data. Removal guides by notice type, the legal framework, and the supervisory body that decides individual requests.
Each notice type has its own removal pathway before the CCF. Read the guide that matches your situation.
The instruments that govern INTERPOL: its mandate, neutrality principle, and the rules on the processing of personal data and notices.
INTERPOL's independent body responsible for individual requests on notices and diffusions. A curated database of published CCF decisions.
Confidential review by a former CCF Legal Officer. A free 30-minute consultation is offered if your situation falls within scope. Fee discussion follows only if the firm confirms it can assist.
Red Notices are issued by the General Secretariat at the request of a member country's INTERPOL National Central Bureau and made available for all member countries. They are grounded in a valid arrest warrant or judicial decision from the requesting country.
While Red Notices act as global alerts, they do not mandate arrest by member countries, leaving the decision to local law enforcement.
INTERPOL itself does not have the authority to arrest individuals. It facilitates international police cooperation by issuing notices like Red Notices. The decision to arrest is made by law enforcement agencies in member countries based on their national laws and the details of the Red Notice.
INTERPOL notices can be challenged through the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files (CCF). The process involves submitting a request to the CCF, which reviews the notice for compliance with INTERPOL's rules. Legal representation can be crucial in effectively presenting a case to the CCF.
The CCF operates as an autonomous and impartial entity within INTERPOL, tasked with ensuring that the processing of personal data aligns with INTERPOL's rules and international legal standards. Its mandate is detailed in its Statute, Operating Rules, and INTERPOL's Constitution.
The Commission is structured into two main chambers: one for supervisory and advisory functions, and a Requests Chamber that handles individual requests for data access or deletion in the INTERPOL Information System, as well as applications for revision.
Individuals have the right to submit the following types of requests to the CCF:
The majority of Red Notices are restricted to law enforcement use only. Extracts of Red Notices are published on INTERPOL's public website at the request of the member country concerned and where the public's help may be needed to locate an individual or where the individual may pose a threat to public safety.
Individuals can request information from INTERPOL to find out if they are subject to a Red Notice. This is done by submitting a request to the CCF.
An INTERPOL notice may be deleted for various reasons, including:
These are common examples of grounds for deletion reviewed by the CCF.
While the founder's prior professional experience within the CCF grants a unique expertise and understanding of the CCF's jurisprudence and decision-making process, it in no way confers any power to influence the CCF's Secretariat, the CCF members, or the decisions they make.
Due to confidentiality and professional secrecy from the founder's previous role, we cannot disclose any case-specific or other confidential or sensitive information acquired through duties at the Commission. Adhering to rigorous ethical standards, our firm abstains from engaging with cases the founder directly handled at the CCF and avoids any situations where previously acquired knowledge could pose ethical conflicts.
Commentary, legal analysis, and press coverage on INTERPOL, the CCF, and the misuse of international police channels.
Challenge a Red Notice or diffusion already in INTERPOL's files.
Find out what INTERPOL holds on you before going further.
Provisional measure to halt the effects of a Notice pending review.
Block a Notice before it is published in INTERPOL's systems.
Reopen a closed CCF case under Article 42 on new facts.
Co-counsel arrangements for firms without an in-house INTERPOL practice.
Practice focus, approach, and how engagements are structured.
Charlie Magri, INTERPOL lawyer and former CCF Legal Officer.
Selected decisions obtained, including deletions and blocks.
Documentaries and investigations featuring the practice.
Transparent pricing structure for every type of engagement.
INTERPOL's Constitution, the Rules on the Processing of Data, the role of the CCF, and how Notice misuse affects individuals.
Step-by-step guidance for Red, Blue, Green, and Yellow Notices.
Database of published CCF decision excerpts showing how the Commission applies INTERPOL's rules in practice.
Latest commentary, case updates, and legal analysis from Otherside.
