The company that had accused him of theft signed a settlement and told the Commission, in writing, that it would not pursue criminal charges any further. The prosecution continued anyway — because the decision to prosecute never belonged to the company in the first place.
A settlement letter that met the revision threshold, but not the merits
He had already lost once before the Commission. Later, he obtained something new: a formal settlement with the company that had accused him of misappropriating funds, together with a letter from its director confirming it would not seek criminal charges against him. Because this genuinely postdated the earlier decision and directly addressed the criminal character of the case, the Commission agreed it met the threshold to reopen the file for a fresh look.
Why reopening the case did not change the outcome
- The prosecuting authority alone controls whether a criminal case proceeds — the individual who signed the settlement was not even on the list of witnesses the prosecution intended to call, and his personal wish to withdraw would not automatically end the case.
- The settlement had been concluded in a different country from the one conducting the criminal proceedings, and the Commission accepted the bureau’s position that it therefore had no bearing on that country’s sovereign criminal process.
- His lawyers had reportedly already been told, before the settlement was even raised with the Commission, that it would have no effect on the ongoing prosecution — meaning the answer was not a surprise improvised for this case.
- The core factual dispute — whether the transferred funds were authorised bonuses or unauthorised misappropriation — remained exactly what it had been before: a genuine disagreement for the national courts to resolve, not something the settlement resolved on its own.
Extradition efforts, examined alongside the settlement
The Commission also checked whether the bureau was still genuinely pursuing extradition, since the applicant had been provisionally released once and had then left the country where he was being held. It found that a further extradition request had in fact been sent to the country he had fled to, and that the requesting authorities had confirmed the settlement made no difference to their intention to pursue him — a continuity of purpose that supported keeping the data in place.
What this decision teaches
- A civil settlement with an alleged victim does not control a criminal prosecution. Only the state’s own prosecuting authority decides whether to continue, and a private release does not bind it.
- Jurisdiction matters as much as the settlement’s substance. An agreement signed in one country was held to have no automatic effect on proceedings conducted by a different one.
- A settlement can still be worth submitting even when it will not end the case. It genuinely can meet the threshold to reopen a file for review, even where the ultimate outcome on the merits stays the same.
- Check who actually has standing to withdraw a complaint. Where the person offering to drop the matter is not even a listed witness for the prosecution, that offer carries less weight than it might first appear to.
Decision extract published by INTERPOL · catalogue reference ccf-2019-08 · 2019 · Red Notice · data maintained. Read the full extract (PDF). Source: interpol.int. Names, countries and dates are redacted in the published extract.
If you have settled with the party described as your victim, find out first whether that party actually controls the prosecution in that country, or whether the state does regardless. Send us the settlement and the charge and we will tell you honestly what it can and cannot do.
Settlements with an alleged victim and state prosecutions
If I settle with the company or person who accused me, will the criminal case end?
Not automatically. In most systems, the decision to continue a criminal prosecution belongs to the state, not to the person or company described as the victim, and a private settlement does not bind that decision.
Does it matter which country the settlement was signed in?
It can. A settlement concluded in a country other than the one running the criminal proceedings has been held to have no automatic bearing on that separate country’s sovereign prosecution.
Is it worth submitting a settlement even if it probably won’t end the case?
Often yes, for a different reason: a genuinely new settlement can meet the threshold to have your case reopened and re-examined, even where the final outcome does not change.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For advice specific to your situation, please consult a qualified lawyer.