The key test: what is actually new?
Article 42 requires more than a better-written version of the previous application. The central question is whether a newly discovered fact could have led the CCF to a different conclusion if it had been known during the original review.
A later document may reveal an earlier unknown fact. A newly issued court decision may contain findings that matter. A document that only rephrases facts already examined may not justify revision. Every candidate fact needs its own analysis.
Potential sources of material
Reasoned judgments, procedural decisions, case-status confirmations and documents lawfully disclosed through national procedures.
Official records explaining why a requested state refused extradition, with attention to the exact factual findings.
Official correspondence, status information or evidence of significant new developments, where legally obtainable.
Independent analysis of authenticity, timelines and inconsistencies. A newly written expert report is not a new fact by itself.
Later official findings need careful relevance analysis. A complaint, press report or NGO statement does not establish Article 42 materiality.
Evidence development workflow
Review the record
Earlier CCF filings and the existing evidence inventory.
Identify gaps
Form hypotheses and separate facts from assertions.
Plan lawful acquisition
Agree a plan with local counsel where national procedures are involved.
Record provenance
Authentication, date of first discovery and any translations.
Assess materiality
Counterarguments and risks, before any CCF filing.
Deliverables
New fact, source, discovery date, reliability and CCF relevance in one table.
What is missing and how it could lawfully be obtained.
Verified documents with provenance notes.
A factual timeline and a concise issues summary.
What we will not do
We will not fabricate, backdate, alter, coach or improperly procure evidence, approach witnesses without lawful authority, or present speculation as established fact. Routine advocacy is not a guaranteed source of new evidence.
FAQs
Can a new lawyer's opinion be enough?
Not necessarily. A newly drafted opinion about facts already known is different from the discovery of a material fact.
Is a new extradition ruling automatically decisive?
No. Its actual findings and legal context must be examined in the light of the CCF's own mandate.
Why record the discovery date?
The six-month condition in Article 42(2) runs from the discovery of the fact, so a careful chronology matters.
- Statute of the CCF
- INTERPOL, CCF Frequently Asked Questions
- CCF Portal Guidance for Applicants, March 2026, s. 10.3
Independent summary. These institutions do not endorse this service. Check the live official guidance before filing.