In a message to his supporters sent on 21st July 2010, Pancho Campo asserted:
'I have been informed today that Interpol accepted my request to take my name out of their list. They have found that a mistake was made and an injustice was committed against me.
'Finally my name is out of their website and I am no longer a "wanted" person.'
'Finally my name is out of their website and I am no longer a "wanted" person.'
A similar message was sent to The Indian Wine Academy:
'It gives me great pleasure to inform you that Interpol has accepted our request to take Pancho from their Red Notice list. We have managed to prove that Pancho´s case was not handled well, the accusations were wrong and he should have never been listed in Interpol’s website. He is now a free and innocent man,’ (http://www.indianwineacademy.com/item_3_396.aspx)
However, a response from Interpol's press office to my enquiry indicates that this is not how the system of Red Notices work:
'Dear Mr Budd,
'Dear Mr Budd,
Thank you for your email.
In response to your enquiry, it is not appropriate for INTERPOL to comment on individual cases.
As there is no Red Notice published on the INTERPOL website for this person, this means that either the Notice is restricted to law enforcement access only, or the country which requested the issue of a Red Notice has cancelled this request.
A Red Notice is issued by the INTERPOL General Secretariat in Lyon, France at the request of a member country on the basis of a valid national arrest warrant. We would therefore advise you to contact the authorities of the country which issued the original warrant as they will be able to update you on its status.'
A Red Notice is issued by the INTERPOL General Secretariat in Lyon, France at the request of a member country on the basis of a valid national arrest warrant. We would therefore advise you to contact the authorities of the country which issued the original warrant as they will be able to update you on its status.'
It would appear then that Pancho Campo's name could only have been removed at the request of the authority – Dubai/United Arab Emirates – that issued the request for a Red Notice in the first place. This suggests that Campo's claim that Interpol have admitted that a mistake was made in issuing the Red Notice may well be unlikely as they would have been responding to 'a request of a member country on the basis of a valid national arrest warrant'.
Unfortunately it remains unclear what was the actual process of removing Pancho Campo's name from Interpol's website. Did this process perhaps involve an agreement with Jackie Wartanian, his former business partner who had filed the original complaint back in 2002?
