The Federation runs a number of member services that are open to you to take advantage of.
+ details >>
The Federation acts on vitually any issue relating to its members or the force in general.
+ details >>
The federation negotiates on all aspects of pay, hours of duty and pension, promotes equality issues and provides free legal advice.
+ details >>Germany sits at the centre of European legal infrastructure. As the EU's largest economy and one of its most active judicial jurisdictions, German courts handle a significant volume of extradition proceedings every year — both under the European Arrest Warrant framework and in response to requests from non-EU states. For individuals with ties to Germany, whether through residence, business, travel, or citizenship, understanding how the German system works is not academic. It is a practical matter of personal freedom.
This page is not an official government source, nor is it affiliated with INTERPOL or any law enforcement body. It is produced by Collegium of International Lawyers, a specialist law firm focused on extradition defence, INTERPOL notice challenges, and cross-border criminal matters. If you are searching for legal guidance in connection with a Germany-related extradition matter, this resource is designed for you.
Germany is a party to all major extradition treaties, including bilateral agreements with non-EU states and the European Arrest Warrant mechanism within the EU. Within Europe, surrender requests are processed by the Higher Regional Courts (Oberlandesgerichte), which assess admissibility before the federal executive decides whether to approve transfer. German courts apply rigorous legal standards, including review of double criminality, the risk of political prosecution, and compliance with fundamental rights under the German Basic Law and the European Convention on Human Rights.
Outside the EU framework, extradition to states such as Russia or other third countries follows a more complex procedure. Germany has historically shown reluctance to extradite individuals where there are credible rule-of-law concerns in the requesting state. This protective posture creates significant procedural space — but only if legal representation is engaged early and strategically.
Not all international arrest situations begin with a formal extradition request. Many are triggered by INTERPOL Red Notices or diffusion notices, which alert law enforcement in member states to a wanted person's presence. Germany, as a major transit and destination country, processes a high volume of INTERPOL-related alerts every year.
A diffusion — unlike a Red Notice — is circulated directly by the requesting state's National Central Bureau and may not undergo the same level of scrutiny by INTERPOL's General Secretariat. This creates particular risk for individuals transiting through German airports or crossing land borders. Detention can occur rapidly, often before legal counsel has time to respond.
The period immediately following an INTERPOL-triggered detention is critical. Legal intervention in the first 48 to 72 hours — including contact with the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files (CCF) and coordination with German defence counsel — can significantly affect the trajectory of the case.
The following case illustrates how diffusion notices can lead to detention in countries sharing a similar legal framework with Germany. An Austrian-Ukrainian businessman became the subject of an INTERPOL diffusion notice at the request of Russian authorities, who alleged fraudulent misappropriation of state funds. The allegations centred on a 2011 contract for industrial equipment, under which a Russian state-owned company transferred over USD 17 million to companies affiliated with the client.
In April 2022, the client was detained in Hungary based on the diffusion. The Metropolitan Court of Budapest subsequently ruled against extradition, finding that the charges were time-barred under Hungarian law. A parallel challenge was filed with the CCF. The Commission found that Russian authorities had failed to explain why they had not engaged Austria — the client's known country of residence — and that the sole act attributed to the client was signing a commercial contract. This was deemed insufficient to establish personal criminal involvement. The data was found non-compliant with INTERPOL's rules, and deletion was recommended.
Germany's extradition framework would apply similar logic. A diffusion-based detention can be challenged in German courts and before the CCF simultaneously. Cases built on vague factual allegations or involving commercially framed disputes are particularly vulnerable to legal challenge under both German constitutional standards and INTERPOL's own rules on data processing.
Cases involving Germany, INTERPOL, and international criminal accusations require a firm that can navigate multiple legal systems simultaneously. A German-qualified defence lawyer may handle the domestic proceedings effectively, but challenging the underlying INTERPOL data — and preventing its use in other jurisdictions — requires separate specialist expertise that relatively few firms possess.
Collegium of International Lawyers focuses precisely on this overlap: extradition defence, CCF submissions, Red Notice and diffusion challenges, and coordinated cross-border strategy. The firm's senior partner, Dr. Anatoliy Yarovyi, holds a Doctor of Law degree and a Master's in Law from both Lviv University and Stanford University. Dr. Anatoliy Yarovyi has represented clients before the European Court of Human Rights and before INTERPOL's supervisory bodies in matters involving extradition, personal data protection, and freedom of movement.
If you need legal advice on extradition matters connected to Germany, INTERPOL notices, Red Notice removal, or cross-border criminal defence, contact Collegium of International Lawyers for a confidential assessment.