Law; no or alternate Interpol?

The Ubbergeek

In public parliance and stuff like those inane 'New World Order' conspirationite fears, there is one major yet discrete world organisation that seem rarely brought up - Interpol. Except maybe oddly in stuff like asian pop culture (was Bruce Lee helping an agent in one of his movie, and CHun-Li the Street Fighter an agent too?).

The organisation was created in 1923, wikipedia told me, and seem to a web of cooperations between national polices, helping to track down international criminals and organisations like the mafias, and seem not related to the UN.

So, how we can by example have NO Interpol up to 'now' (is it inevitable?)?
Maybe an harsher cold war, one side fearing that this Organisation is tied to 'capitalist fascist states' or 'red commies', and refuse to join by a certain isolationism, rendering it neutered partially? Or the links in WWII with Nazis are deeper, it get unmade?

What would be the conserquences on law enforcement and judiciaries of the world? The mafias and criminal cartels of the world are stronger, as there is quite less international cooperations?

OR an alternate Interpol, how and what? Maybe it is indeed a creation of one block, or a successfull and surviving Society of Nations? Or it is locked after WWII to the UN?
 

aktarian

Well, you could have regional organisations, like Europol, or strong cooperation between two or small group of countries. E.g. US and Italy regarding mafia, US and Latin American countries regarding narcocartels.....
 

The Ubbergeek

aktarian said:
Well, you could have regional organisations, like Europol, or strong cooperation between two or small group of countries. E.g. US and Italy regarding mafia, US and Latin American countries regarding narcocartels.....
Click to expand...

Yeah, I could see local-regional cooperations at least.
 

MSZ

Banned
It is certainly possible for the current Interpol not to exist or not be anything like it is today. Interpol started out as a "know how sharing" organization, not one meant for policeman from different countries to work together to capture criminals working in different countries. That happened later as organizaed crime became more organized and also international; this one thing you can't prevent.

But, you could very well imagine a situation where extradition treaties don't become the norm for developed states, leading in turn to police cooperation to be significantly reduced - there is no point for one national police to seek to work with another, if that other country won't give the criminal up. Seeing that non-extradition used to be the norm before the war, and for decades after, you could imagine the trend not changing, or the politicians simply screwing up and not signing appropriate treaties. Result would certainly be stricter laws in detaining foreigners, more bilateral treaties on police and judiciary cooperation, general extradition procedures being much more complex. Possibly would also lead to different border controls - IIRC most of them don't have access to criminal databases, but if capturing someone once he sets foot on a countries soil would be the only chance to get him, it might happen.
 
Meadow

Meadow

Interpol itself could be disbanded after the, er, record of some of the men running it in the early 1940s.
 

MSZ

Banned
The Ubbergeek said:
So, how it would change international crimes groups and criminals, from mafias to terrorists like Carlos?
Click to expand...

Not much, since international crime never have a single organizational structure. But without an international pursuit group, escaping punishment by fleeing overseas, or even ruling crime groups from abroad would be more common. Say, without extradition treaties between the USA and the carribean islands, drug dealers may build their headquarters there, and from there run their businesses without fear. More crime bosses - local dictators relations, with cleptocratic regimes giving criminals shelter in return for a cut in the profits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top