1. Read the decision before planning another filing
Separate the CCF's conclusions about INTERPOL data processing from your view of the national criminal case. The CCF does not decide guilt and does not rule on extradition.
Build a chronology: earlier submissions, the facts relied on, the evidence available at the time, the CCF's stated reasoning and later developments. A document is not a new fact just because the document is recent.
2. Understand the Article 42 test
A revision relies on a newly discovered fact with a real potential effect on the earlier decision. Disagreement, repetition and reworded submissions are not enough. The application must generally be made within six months after discovery of the fact.
3. Audit the evidence
Possible lines of inquiry include national court records, new official communications, a reasoned extradition ruling, corrections in source documents or later official findings. Each needs a provenance record and an explanation of its relevance to the earlier CCF conclusion.
New evidence research & verification →
4. Don't confuse separate procedures
A national criminal appeal, asylum proceedings, an extradition hearing, CCF revision and UN human-rights mechanisms all have different mandates and deadlines. Filing one does not stay or satisfy another.
5. Decide whether further work is proportionate
A credible review can conclude that there is no present factual basis for Article 42. That conclusion saves money and procedural confusion. Other lawful remedies may exist independently, but they are not automatic routes to CCF reversal.
Checklist after a rejection
- Secure the CCF decision and earlier correspondence.
- List the facts known before and after the decision.
- Record the first discovery date for every potentially new fact.
- Identify the source and authenticity of each new document.
- Ask whether the fact could realistically affect the CCF's earlier assessment.
- Check urgent national procedural deadlines separately.
- Seek qualified advice before submitting.
FAQs
Can I submit the same request with a new lawyer?
A new representative does not replace the Article 42 test. The factual basis is what matters.
Can a change in political circumstances help?
Potentially, if specific newly discovered relevant facts can be established. A general change of argument is not enough.
Does a UN application count as new evidence?
Not automatically. Submitting a complaint does not itself establish a new fact relevant to CCF revision.
Independent summary. These institutions do not endorse this service. Check the live official guidance before filing.