Interpol Under Siege by Uninformed Bloggers

Mark Leon Goldberg - December 23, 2009 - 6:29 pm

Last week, the Obama Administration issued an executive order that extended certain diplomatic privileges to Interpol--the International Criminal Police Organization.  This was a pretty innocuous bureaucratic move, but it has apparently sparked some serious concerns among a certain cadre of blogger.  For example, you have Steve Shippert and Clyde Middleton of ThreatsWatch worrying that this "could conceivably include...Americans arrested on our soil by INTERPOL officers."  And Andy McCarthy of National Review writes,

"This international police force...will be unrestrained by the U.S. Constitution and American law while it operates in the United States and affects both Americans and American interests outside the United States...Why would we elevate an international police force above American law? Why would we immunize an international police force from the limitations that constrain the FBI and other American law-enforcement agencies?"

Both McCarthy and the ThreatsWatch duo's understanding of how Interpol works seems to be heavily shaped by fiction and film. In real life,  Interpol is also not an "international police force."  This would imply that Interpol is composed of units of officers that can chase criminals across the world, Jason Bourne style.   In fact, there is no such thing as an "Interpol officer," as such.  Rather, law enforcement officers from Interpol's member states are seconded to the organization from national law enforcement agencies, like the FBI, U.S. Marshals, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, ect. 

This is not just a semantic distinction. Officers seconded to Interpol do not have any sort of transnational executive arrest power.   Rather, officers seconded to Interpol do things like coordinate busts of international child pornography rings.  The people actually making the arrests, though, are members of the national law enforcement of the country where the crimes are committed.  They are not "Interpol Officers" --  because there is no such thing as an "Interpol Officer."  Further, "Interpol" can't arrest an American on American soil, a Canadian on Canadian soil or a Rwandan on a Rwandan soil. Only national law enforcement can do that. 

As to the specific reaon why the Obama administration would decide, last week, to extend to Interpol the same suite of diplomatic privileges that are typically accorded to international organizations?  I don't have a good answer for that. My sense is that it probably has something to with the accessibility of Interpol's secure criminal databases (on things like stolen passports and the like).  But that is a question that could pretty easily be answered by a phone call to the Justice Department. 

I can say with authority that stoking concerns about Interpol whisking Americans away is un-informed fear mongering. 

*For the record, I worked at Interpol's Headquarters in Lyon France in 2002.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4) Subscribe to these comments

Devid @ Mar 18th 2010 3:56AM

I was very pleased to find this site.I wanted to thank you for this great read!! I definitely enjoying every little bit of it and I have you bookmarked to check out new stuff you post.
ucvhost | windows vps | ucvhost

REPLY »

Teflon Ron @ Dec 29th 2009 5:05PM

Bulldoze the UN into the bay and interpol along with it.

REPLY »

Hyphenated American @ Dec 29th 2009 2:27PM

Firstly, no reply is given to the reasons why Interpol's information should be protected mroe than all the secret files from the CIA and FBI. Indeed, why? Would any of the liberals here support if same protection was given to CIA - an organization that CANNOT arrest people in the US either. Ahm?

And here are a few more snippets on the Interpol:
Interpol claims it is the largest police organization in the world - which makes it sound quite benevelovent given that its materials are now unobtainable by the American Courts and American public. Cockroaches love when it's dark, right?

Sudanese government asks Interpol to arrest the opposition leaders:
http://www.sudan.net/news/posted/16053.html

Interpol trying to arrest Ms.Bhutto:
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakis...

Interpol is attempting to arrest Venesuelian opposition leader
http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5j-U8BHosoUFOao2TvqezE...

I mean, if this does not look like the growth of stasi....

BTW, if Interpol has a warrant (asked for by Iran and granted by Interpol) to arrest Israeli politician who is visiting US - does the US police have to comply with this order or not? What happens if Interpol representatives visit the politican house - can they detain him? Can an Israeli politician force Interpol to open its files in the US? What does an Interpol warrant mean for the US law enforcement? Is it a piece of paper that they HAVE to ignore unless the US judge signs a warrant? If Interpol decides to spy in US on anti-Obama leaders - what is the legal remedy?

I am amazed how self-proclaimed civil-libertarians applaud the world largest police organization to become completely opaque to the public. Hope and Change!

REPLY »

Visitor @ Dec 29th 2009 12:28PM

If there is nothing to this, then why can't I find a single MSM video report on it?

REPLY »

General Washington @ Dec 29th 2009 11:20AM

hussein is going to get axed. this is going to be so much fun.

REPLY »

DarsMind @ Dec 29th 2009 1:15AM

Yes Mr. Goldberg it is simple but I, being a simple American, remain a bit confused. You gave some good information but you still didn't explain why President Obama needed to grant immunity to any persons associated with INTERPOL? Why after 27 years did this President feel it necessary to anything that would cause such angst among the good people of this country? As one person suggested, these INTERPOL officials need quicker access of to Passports and Government Documents. I'm all for expediting passports but that seems easily accomplished without usurping the constitution. If you worked at INTERPOL you would know they are not an Embassy nor are they here to engage in diplomatic exercises. They are however, the law enforcement arm of the WORLD. So thank you for the new information but you've only succeeded in causing us to seek more information- something you should have done before you wrote this dribble.

REPLY »

Alvin @ Dec 28th 2009 11:26PM

Lawrence Oshanek - You just defined the Progressive movement.

REPLY »

Visitor @ Dec 27th 2009 2:49PM

If one takes the time to do the research, the dark and sinister plot to strip away US sovereignty turns out to be nothing of the sort.

Obama most likely was responding to the issuing of special passports by Interpol at their 78th general assembly in Singapore this last October. By eliminating the lengthly visa process the special passports would allow investigators faster entry to member nations requesting assistance from Interpol.

The US is not the only nation to grant Interpol diplomatic privileges over the last several months. FYI... Interpol has no far reaching police powers, they only go to countries who request their assistance.

See the October 13, 2009 AP story "Interpol Seeks Visa-free Travel For Its Investigators"...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/10/13/ap/world/main5380873.shtml

REPLY »

Visitor @ Dec 28th 2009 11:40AM

In adition to my earlier post, let me direct you to Articles 2, and 3 of Interpol's Constitution and General Regulations which limit Interpol's authority and activity. Our rights and the protections as provided by the US Constitution are still intact!

"Article 2
Its aims are:
(1) To ensure and promote the widest possible mutual assistance between all criminal police authorities within the limits of the laws existing in the different countries and in the spirit of the 'Universal Declaration of Human Rights';
(2) To establish and develop all institutions likely to contribute effectively to the prevention and suppression of ordinary law crimes.

Article 3
It is strictly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character."

REPLY »

Visitor @ Dec 27th 2009 2:29PM

Mr. Goldberg, do you think we're a bunch of ignorant fools?

REPLY »

Add Your Comments
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image. Ignore spaces and be careful about upper and lower case.
  • Related Sites
  • UNITED NATIONS FOUNDATIONS
  • UN WIRE
  • Join Us On
  • t
  • f