When a second opinion is valuable
This service is for applicants whose requests for deletion or correction were rejected, applicants whose earlier revision failed, and instructed counsel who want an independent review of the record. It can also help when representation has changed or when key documents became available later.
What we review
- The specific relief sought in the earlier CCF request.
- The decision's reasoning and the provisions of INTERPOL's rules it applied.
- Which factual questions were addressed, left open or misunderstood.
- Which documents and facts the applicant knew at the relevant time.
- Later developments, and the date each one first became known.
- The difference between an additional legal argument and a newly discovered, potentially material fact.
When challenging a CCF refusal makes sense
A weak revision application costs time and can make the next filing harder. We tell you which group you are in before anything is drafted.
Worth a full review
- A specific fact appeared after the decision
- It answers a point the CCF relied on
- You can document when you learned of it
- You are well inside six months
Needs a closer look
- The fact existed earlier but you could not have known it
- You are close to the six-month limit
- Your situation changed, which may point to a new request
- A revision was already refused once
Probably not worth filing
- You only disagree with the reasoning
- The evidence was available and not used
- The fact does not touch the CCF's findings
- More than six months have passed with no explanation
How the review runs
Read the decision
Map the reasoning paragraph by paragraph: the rules applied, what the National Central Bureau said, and where the outcome depends on a fact.
Build the chronology
List what was known before the decision and what came to light afterwards, with dates.
Test Article 42
Check each candidate fact against the three conditions: new, capable of changing the conclusion, within six months of discovery.
Recommend the route
Revision, a new request, other lawful steps, or no filing at all.
What you receive
A structured outline of the decision, the issues it decided and the evidence it cited.
Documents or facts that may warrant further investigation, with provenance and relevance still to be assessed.
An evidence-based view of whether further Article 42 work appears justified. This may be a recommendation not to file.
A prioritised list of lawful next steps and, where appropriate, referrals to local counsel.
The limits of an independent review
A second opinion does not overturn a CCF decision. It cannot create new facts where none exist, and it cannot guarantee that the Commission will accept a revision. We have no special access to CCF deliberations.
FAQs
Does an earlier lawyer's mistake count as a new fact?
Not automatically. The Article 42 test concerns newly discovered facts capable of affecting the earlier conclusion. Any procedural concern has to be assessed on its precise facts.
Should I resubmit my application straight away?
Not before the new factual basis and the timing have been reviewed. Repeating elements the CCF has already examined is unlikely to meet the revision threshold.
Do I need to end my current lawyer's mandate?
No. An independent assessment can complement existing representation, subject to conflicts, authority and your arrangement with your lawyer.
Independent summary. These institutions do not endorse this service. Check the live official guidance before filing.