Due process of law international wanted list

When establishing/ proving the fact that a person is on the international wanted list, two alternative legal positions have actually been formed: 1) the provisions of the current CPC of Ukraine impose on the prosecutor/investigator the obligation to provide evidence to confirm the declaration, but not the fact of the suspect's being on the international wanted list; 2) to confirm the fact of putting a person on the international wanted list, it is necessary to provide supporting documents of Interpol, which certify/confirm the fact of the person's being on the international wanted list. According to the first legal position, in fact, the final results of the activities of the pre-trial investigation body aimed at placing a person on the international wanted list are replaced by intermediate ones. In addition, this approach does not take into account situations where, based on the results of an Interpol check of the compliance of documents submitted by the pre-trial investigation body, it turns out that they do not meet the minimum criteria for the publication of red notices, and there are no grounds for applying international search mechanisms in relation to the person. Due to the lack of unity of judicial practice in this matter, it seems relevant to find out what are the components of the due process of putting a person on the international wanted list. Thus, the due process of law for putting a person on the international wanted list includes, among other things, taking measures to establish the location of a person before putting him or her on the wanted list, properly summoning the person before putting him or her on the wanted list, and properly notifying the person of such summons before putting him or her on the wanted list. A systematic analysis of Articles 111, 135, 278, 541, 542 of the CPC of Ukraine shows that in situations where a person is in a country with which Ukraine has diplomatic relations and where international legal assistance is possible and is being provided, any notifications to such a person should be made in the manner of international legal assistance. At the same time, due process of law for putting a person on the international wanted list is causally related to compliance with the procedure for notifying a person of suspicion. Since the presence of the suspect status of the person to be put on the wanted list (international/interstate/that carried out on the territory of Ukraine) is the legal basis for putting such a person on the wanted list. Therefore, if a person has not acquired the status of a suspect as a result of improper notification of suspicion, such a person cannot be put on any wanted list, including the international wanted list. Courts ignoring the facts of violation by the pre-trial investigation body of the proper procedure for putting a person on the international wanted list and substituting intermediate results of the pre-trial investigation body's activities aimed at putting a person on the international wanted list for the final results, leads to a situation where a person is treated as a person on the international wanted list, although there are no grounds for applying the international wanted list mechanisms. The absence of judicial control over the proper procedural status leads to a situation where a wanted notice is issued in respect of a person who has not acquired the status of a suspect. Is such a practice a violation of the due process of law in the international wanted list? Obviously, yes.