INTERPOL, Extradition and crypto (part 7)

Successful extradition of a Brazilian national from Switzerland to the United States to face indictment for alleged cryptocurrency fraud scheme.

Background

In previous articles we have detailed how the borderless nature of crypto transactions has resulted in jurisdictions requesting that INTERPOL issue notices to try and locate individuals accused of criminality (specifically, allegations involving crypto) and who are based abroad, with a view to potential extradition; there have now been several examples of subsequent extradition requests.

Indeed, using INTERPOL to pursue individuals accused of allegations involving cryptoassets is becoming more common.

Following earlier reports that South Korea had asked INTERPOL to issue a Red Notice for developer Do Kwon, the team wrote a blog titled “Can INTERPOL issue a Red Notice in relation to allegations involving crypto?”.

We recently wrote an article on how although Hex Founder Richard Heart found himself subject to an INTERPOL Red Notice, a United States Court dismissed the case against him, and, subsequently, about how a Red Notice had been requested to locate Hayden Davis, a citizen of the US allegedly behind the launch of several memecoins. We also explained how the US had secured the extradition of a Russian national from Portugal to face allegations relating to crypto.

In our latest article, we reported the arrest of a crypto-scam suspect in Bangkok, Thailand, who faced extradition to Vietnam.

EXTRADITION FOR CRYPTO FRAUD: The story of a Brazilian national extradited to the United States

We now explore the successful extradition of a Brazilian national from Switzerland to the United States to face indictment for an alleged cryptocurrency fraud scheme.

It is reported that the citizen of Brazil appeared in U.S. District Court in February this year, after being extradited from Switzerland to face a 13-count indictment alleging wire fraud and conspiracy regarding his bitcoin investment scheme.

It was alleged that the suspect, under the name of Douver T. Braga, operated a bitcoin investment scheme, which was actually a Ponzi scheme.

According to the indictment, Braga conspired with others to create a cryptocurrency trading platform called Trade Coin Club (TCC) with an office in Belize. As early as 2016, Braga worked with others to promote TCC, claiming that investors would make money using TCC’s “sophisticated software program” that allowed investors to profit on the fluctuating price of bitcoin. Braga also promised that investors could make money by referring other investors to the platform. In reality, there was no investment platform and no sophisticated software. Those who invested early were paid off by later investors, as in a Ponzi scheme. Through promotion and false pretences, the suspect induced thousands of individuals to entrust over 82,000 bitcoin, valued at over $290 million at the time of investment, and to deposit it with TCC. The online portal, which supposedly tracked the activity of investment accounts, was a work of fiction and there was no actual trading activity. By withdrawing and misappropriating investor funds, at least $50 million in bitcoin was transferred to accounts Braga controlled between December 2016 and July 2019. By late 2017 and early 2018, investors had difficulties with accessing their funds. By January 2018, TCC announced that it was ceasing operations in the US and cancelling the accounts of its investors.

The suspect is now charged with 12 counts of wire fraud, for 12 wires investors sent to TCC for deposits in their fake “accounts.” He is also charged with one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud.

The charges are punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

Crypto and extradition

Those who fear that allegations involving crypto have been made against them could also be at risk of extradition.

As was discussed in a previous blog entitled “Can I be extradited for allegations involving crypto?” and “Another US crypto extradition”, due to the borderless nature of crypto transactions, any allegation of criminality will inevitably involve multiple jurisdictions.  As such, there may be numerous jurisdictions claiming authority and trying to extradite an alleged perpetrator to their jurisdiction to face justice.  There have now been two examples of individuals being extradited to the US in relation to allegations involving crypto.

The vast majority (if not all) of criminal allegations that underpin a crypto criminal investigation are of a financial crime nature, e.g. fraud, money laundering and insider dealing.  They can also include alleged offences relating to the breach of financial regulations.

These offences, by their very nature, can take place across multiple jurisdictions and are therefore types of offences for which multiple countries can claim authority, including in relation to conduct outside their own country (hence extradition can be an option).

Due to the borderless nature of the effect of these crimes, a country could assert jurisdiction against an individual who has not even stepped foot in that country.

As such, jurisdictions may additionally utilise INTERPOL to locate an individual and seek their arrest prior to issuing any extradition request.

Therefore, due to the nature of this technology, and as this technology becomes more prevalent, there will surely be a large increase in the instances of INTERPOL being used to locate individuals accused of allegations involving crypto.

INTERPOL and cryptoassets

More specifically, we have previously written about INTERPOL’s specialist team developed to coordinate efforts globally against digital assets crime.

As we have previously written, there have been increasing reports of countries using INTERPOL to pursue individuals alleged to have been involved with criminality concerning cryptoassets.

INTERPOL has recently been more active in seizing online digital wallets and exchanges, including the exchange known as Cryptonator, for allegedly receiving the proceeds of crime.

Suitability of INTERPOL

There is no doubt that crime in crypto presents unique challenges to authorities, the decentralised nature of crypto and the distance between them and more conventional financial institutions creates significant hurdles in international policing.

The UK continues to pass legislation, recently enabling authorities to investigate and seize assets suspected of being used in criminal activities relating to crypto (please see our other blogs on crypto regulation).

Other INTERPOL members, however, may not be as quick in establishing a regulatory framework, making international cooperation even more challenging.

However, it remains the case that given the decentralised and borderless nature of some cryptoasset transactions, an organisation with global reach like INTERPOL is well-positioned to assist with both pursuing individuals alleged to have been involved with criminal offences involving crypto, and also tracing any associated proceeds of crime.

As always, it is important to ensure that INTERPOL is always used in compliance with all its applicable rules and regulations.

International crypto dimension – criminal investigations, litigation and extradition

Those who fear they may be subject to an extradition request from the UK, or who are just concerned about liability across multiple jurisdictions including the UK, should get in touch.

Gherson’s criminal litigation, regulatory and investigatory team combine an expert knowledge of criminal and regulatory law underpinned with a firm understanding of digital assets and blockchain technology.  As such, the team are able to provide expert strategic advice to anyone facing investigation in relation to any allegation of criminality involving cryptoassets. Working alongside the extradition team, Gherson’s criminal litigation, investigations and regulatory team are able to provide an unparalleled service in any case with an international dimension.  The team are also able to call upon lawyers in multiple other jurisdictions and build multi-jurisdictional teams to assist with any suitable defence.

INTERPOL, Red Notices and crypto

In addition, those who fear that a jurisdiction may have requested INTERPOL to process data relating to them in relation to allegations of offences involving crypto, or are just concerned about potential liability, should get in contact.

Indeed, Gherson Solicitors continue to receive requests for expert advice and assistance from those who fear they may have outstanding financial issues arising. That advice tackles:

1. How to best approach a possible INTERPOL red notice;
2. Preparing for potential criminal proceedings / an extradition request;
3. Preparing for a situation where a civil matter or commercial dispute could be used to initiate bogus criminal proceedings; and
4. Even exploring the possibility of instigating civil litigation proceedings to recover any misappropriated assets.

Gherson have previously written a series of blogs designed to assist those who fear they might be subject to INTERPOL measures (including a Red Notice):

INTERPOL and Red Notice Challenges

How to Remove an INTERPOL Red Notice

INTERPOL Red Notices and Extradition

How do I know if I am subject to an INTERPOL Red Notice?

Regulation and compliance

In these constantly changing times, firms that deal with cryptoassets, and additionally have exposure to firms that do, will need to carefully consider all their systems and controls to ensure that they are able to comply with all relevant AML and sanctions regulations.

Updated: 08.07.2025

How Gherson can assist

Gherson’s white-collar crime and regulatory team are able to provide advice and assistance with AML and sanctions compliance, including in situations involving cryptoassets.

Additionally, the team has recently started a series on the regulation of crypto, with the aim of advising those who work in the compliance of this sector.  In addition, for those who would like advice on relevant issues, including those who have had issues with the FCA registration process, our specialist regulatory and compliance team can guide individuals and companies through the process.

Please do not hesitate to contact us for further advice, send us an e-mail, or, alternatively, follow us on X, Facebook, or LinkedIn to stay up-to-date.

The information in this blog is for general information purposes only and does not purport to be comprehensive or to provide legal advice. Whilst every effort is made to ensure the information and law is current as of the date of publication it should be stressed that, due to the passage of time, this does not necessarily reflect the present legal position. Gherson accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from accessing or reliance on information contained in this blog. For formal advice on the current law please do not hesitate to contact Gherson. Legal advice is only provided pursuant to a written agreement, identified as such, and signed by the client and by or on behalf of Gherson.

©Gherson 2025