Non-democratic states continue to issue international arrest warrants for dissidents, journalists and political opponents. The fact that the problem is continuing to be present means that regimes adapt their conducts and ultimately the new reforms do not catch up with the reality. In an article published on the Internet platform Open Democracy, Matt Mulberry writes about the necessary Interpol reforms proposed by the Open Dialog Foundation.
”The new set of reforms proposed by the Open Dialogue Foundation has been written in a relatively simple language, on mere four pages but, undeniably, these proposals are courageous and broad. Even though most of them seem pragmatic and direct, other, upon reading, may give an impression of disdainful rejection of references to security, budgetary, operational and legal matters related to Interpol’s activities” Mulberry thinks.
The author mentions one of the “bravest” reforms which would be about publishing “red alerts” on Interpol’s website upon their issuance. And even though from Interpol’s point of view the reform is hard to be implemented (failure to announce the “red alerts” may mean that the persons who are their objects may feel encouraged to travel which enhances the probability of them being stopped at a border when attempting to use their passport; on the other hand, the publishing would encourage them to hide in the country of their stay), in its report entitled ”Interpol reform: don’t let it be stopped halfway”, the Open Dialogue Foundation concludes that ”It would not pose serious threats to prosecuting real criminals but for people with the refugee status it would mean a higher probability of escape from detention upon a politically motivated demand. Anyone could quickly check their own data. International organisations could more effectively monitor cases of abusing the Interpol and see which states commit such breaches”.