New Delhi: Two years after Interpol rejected India’s request to issue a Red Corner Notice (RCN) against designated terrorist Gurpatwant Singh Pannun—legal counsel for Sikhs for Justice—on terror charges, for a second time for “lack of evidence”, India hasn’t appealed against the decision, ThePrint has learnt. The SFJ is banned in India.
An RCN is a request issued by the Interpol to locate and provisionally arrest an individual awaiting extradition. It is issued by the General Secretariat of the global police body at the request of a member country or an international tribunal based on a valid national arrest warrant.
According to sources in the security establishment, the first application to issue an RCN against Pannun was made in 2018, which was rejected by the Interpol in 2019. Following the rejection, the agency filed an appeal with additional documents and more evidence against Pannun on 21 May, 2021. This, too, was rejected in 2022 citing “insufficient evidence to prove his links with terror attacks or its funding”
The Interpol also stated that the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, or UAPA, under which the requests for RCN was submitted, is criticised as a “tool for targeting of minorities” and, thus, does not satisfy the criteria for issuance of the RCN, sources confirmed.
Since then, no appeal has been filed. “We have not approached against the order,” a source in the NIA said, referring to the 2022 rejection.
“In many instances when we seek RCN from Interpol, our evidence does not match with international standards. They seek additional documents, more evidence, numerous clarifications, before acting on the request,” the source said.
“If the request is rejected, and the appeal, too, is rejected, there is a very bleak chance that Interpol would reconsider its decision. For each appeal fresh evidence, which is concrete, has to be produced,” the source said.
Moreover, after a request for issuance of RCN is made by a country, the person in question is given time to file a response which is also reviewed by the Commission. The request made by the country is also reviewed.
In his submission against India’s request for RCN, Pannun had stated that he is a “political entity” which was also referred to by the Interpol saying that the SFJ’s counsel’s activities reportedly have a “clear political dimension”.
“It is strictly forbidden for the Organisation to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character,” Article 3 of Constitution for Interpol reads.
A source said, “He claimed and misguided that since he is a political entity, and speaks against India, he is being targeted because of it. On the contrary, he has played key roles in terror activities in India”.
The request for RCN was applied through the National Central Bureau, which works under the Central Bureau of Investigation, India’s nodal agency for Interpol, on behalf of the National Investigation Agency (NIA). The NCB processes and coordinates RCN requests for all Indian investigating agencies.
In an email response to ThePrint on why the RCN request was rejected, the Interpol refused to comment.
The revelation of the alleged assassination plot against Pannun has strained the relationship between the US and India.
Former Indian intelligence officer Vikash Yadav has been charged for orchestrating the “murder-for-hire” plot against Pannun and his name has been mentioned in the superseding indictment that came out last week.
Yadav is accused of conspiring to kill Pannun along with Nikhil Gupta, who was extradited from Czech Republic and is currently facing trial in the US.
Also read: US and allies boast of killing whomever they want, yet lecture India on morality
Designated terrorist, recruiting youngsters
In the 2021 request made by India, the arrest warrant issued by the Special NIA Court in Mohali in February that year was also cited. Here, the agency accused Pannun of radicalising, and recruiting accused to carry out terror acts.
“He has been recruiting people on social media and assigns them tasks to spread terror in India. He also funds terror activities in India,” a source said.
Sources said that, so far, no extradition request has been made for Pannun.
As for other “wanted” Indian fugitives Satinderjit Singh alias Goldy Brar too, India hasn’t made extradition requests. However, an RCN was issued against Brar.
ThePrint reached the MEA via text messages. This report will be updated if and when a response is received.
According to intelligence sources, Pannun, who has dual US and Canadian citizenship, has six cases registered against him by the NIA, including one in connection with damage to the Tricolour and hoisting of the “Khalistan flag” in the office of the Deputy Commissioner’s office in Punjab’s Moga in August 2020.
Additionally, at least 22 other cases are registered against him just in Punjab, including a sedition case, some of which have been taken over by the NIA. There are also cases registered against him in Delhi, Haryana, Punjab and Himachal Pradesh.
(Edited by Zinnia Ray Chaudhuri)