Cybercrime Extradition Defence

Israeli Cybercrime Extradition Defence Lawyers

Defending Israeli tech professionals, security researchers, and digital entrepreneurs against US CFAA charges, hacking allegations, and international computer crime extradition requests. We challenge technical evidence, invoke research exemptions, and secure Red Notice deletions through the CCF.

Schedule Emergency Consultation CCF Application for Cyber Cases
89%
Cyber extradition refusals secured
92%
Red Notices deleted in tech cases
3-7 days
Emergency response time
Urgent Cybercrime Extradition Assessment

100% confidential · Response within 24h

Protecting Israeli Tech Professionals from International Prosecution

At a Glance
Expert Cybercrime Extradition Defence

Further Protecting Israeli Tech Professionals from International Prosecution

The Problem
Risks Without Specialist Cybercrime Defence
✕
✕
✕
✕
✕
Our Solution
Protection With Expert Cybercrime Extradition Lawyers
✓
✓
✓
✓
✓

01
Emergency Arrest Response & Red Notice Analysis

Within 24 hours of contact, we obtain the Interpol Red Notice, analyze the underlying foreign arrest warrant (US FBI, UK NCA, Europol), and assess dual criminality under Israeli Computer Law 5755-1995 and Penal Law 5737-1977. If client is detained, we immediately file for bail at the Tel Aviv or Jerusalem District Court under Section 10 of the Extradition Law, emphasizing ties to Israel, no flight risk, and weak dual criminality. Simultaneously, we prepare the CCF application challenging the Red Notice under Article 3 ICPO Constitution (political/discriminatory grounds) and RPED Article 83 (proportionality, data accuracy). Average response time: 3-7 days from initial contact to filed motions.

02
Technical Evidence Review & Dual Criminality Assessment

Our cyber law team—including former Unit 8200 analysts and certified ethical hackers—reviews the foreign charging documents and technical allegations (IP logs, server access records, forensic reports). We assess whether the alleged conduct constitutes a crime under Israeli Computer Law Sections 4-5 (unauthorized access, interference), Copyright Law 5768-2007, Trade Secrets Law 5765-2005, or Fraud and Breach of Trust provisions in the Penal Law. Many CFAA cases fail dual criminality because Israeli law requires proof of malicious intent (תכלית פסולה) absent in security research. We prepare expert affidavits from Israeli cyber law professors and technical witnesses for submission to the District Court.

03
CCF Application & Interpol Red Notice Deletion

We file the detailed CCF application with the Commission for the Control of Interpol's Files in Lyon, citing Article 3 ICPO Constitution (non-intervention in political/commercial disputes), RPED Articles 74-83 (data quality, proportionality), and specific defects in the requesting state's process. In cybercrime cases, we emphasize: (1) requesting state's vague definition of hacking capturing lawful research; (2) political motivation or trade protection (common in US cases against Israeli competitors); (3) absence of fair trial guarantees (US plea bargain pressure, excessive sentences). Timeline: Interpol acknowledges within 2-4 weeks, issues preliminary decision in 3-5 months, final decision after any state objections in 5-9 months. Our deletion rate in cyber cases: 92%.

04
Extradition Hearing Defence at District Court

If extradition proceedings advance (usually 6-12 months after arrest), we defend at the Tel Aviv or Jerusalem District Court under the Extradition Law 5714-1954. Key arguments: (1) Section 3 political offense exception (cyber-espionage allegations often mask commercial disputes); (2) Section 4 dual criminality failure; (3) Section 11 inadequate foreign evidence (hearsay, no probable cause under Israeli standards); (4) Human rights violations (Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, ECHR Article 8) due to family separation or disproportionate sentencing. We cross-examine foreign law enforcement via video link and present Israeli cyber law experts. District Court issues reasoned decision; if extradition ordered, we immediately appeal to Israeli Supreme Court.

05
Supreme Court Appeal & Post-Decision Protection

Appeals to the Israeli Supreme Court focus on legal errors, human rights violations, and misapplication of dual criminality standards. The Court sits in panels of 3-5 justices and issues binding precedent. In parallel, we coordinate with the Israeli Ministry of Justice (which must approve extradition even if courts allow it) and, if necessary, the Attorney General. Post-decision, we assist clients with: (1) travel ban removal in non-requesting countries; (2) media strategy to protect professional reputation; (3) coordination with foreign counsel if client chooses voluntary surrender with negotiated terms. If Red Notice deleted via CCF, we secure confirmation letters for border control and monitor for re-issuance attempts by requesting states.

0
%
Cybercrime Extradition Refusals
Israeli courts reject extradition in 89% of our cybercrime cases due to dual criminality failure, political motivation, or human rights concerns—significantly above the 72% national average for all extradition defences.
0
%
Red Notice Deletions (Cyber)
CCF deletes 92% of Red Notices in our cybercrime cases within 5-9 months, citing Article 3 ICPO Constitution violations, disproportionate foreign statutes, and lack of fair trial guarantees in requesting states.
0
+
Cyber Cases Defended
Since 2015, we have represented over 150 Israeli tech professionals, security researchers, and digital entrepreneurs against CFAA, Computer Misuse Act, and EU Directive 2013/40 allegations across 18 requesting states.
0
mos
Average CCF Decision Time
Interpol's CCF issues preliminary decisions in cybercrime cases within 3-5 months and final decisions (including state objection periods) in 5-9 months—faster than financial crime cases due to clear Article 3 analysis.
Expert Cybercrime Extradition Team

Israeli Lawyers Who Understand Both Code and Law

DC
Adv. Daniel Cohen
Lead Partner — Cybercrime Extradition & International Tech Law

Daniel has defended over 90 cybercrime extradition cases since 2015, including landmark refusals in CFAA and Computer Misuse Act matters. Former prosecutor in the Tel Aviv District Attorney's cybercrime unit, he lectures on international cyber law at Tel Aviv University Faculty of Law and advises the Israeli Bar Association's technology law committee. Fluent in English, Hebrew, and Russian; admitted to practice before all Israeli courts including the Supreme Court.

Case Results

Israeli Tech Professionals We've Protected

★★★★★

"I was detained at Ben Gurion on a US Red Notice alleging CFAA violations for penetration testing I conducted as part of my legitimate security research. Daniel and Miriam filed a CCF application within 72 hours, demonstrating the research was lawful under Israeli law and international Wassenaar standards. Interpol deleted the Red Notice in 4 months, and the Tel Aviv District Court refused extradition on dual criminality grounds. I'm now back to work and traveling freely."

YR
Y.R.
Security Researcher, Tel Aviv — US CFAA Case Dismissed
★★★★★

"As a blockchain developer, I faced extradition to Germany on allegations of 'unauthorized access' to a competitor's API—standard industry practice in Israel. This firm's technical understanding was critical. They presented expert testimony from Israeli computer science professors and demonstrated the conduct was not criminal under Israeli Computer Law. The Jerusalem District Court refused extradition, and the German Red Notice was deleted via CCF after 6 months. Highly recommended for any tech professional facing these issues."

DK
D.K.
Blockchain Developer, Jerusalem — German Extradition Refused
★★★★★

"I was accused by UK authorities of 'hacking' for accessing publicly available data via web scraping—a practice my Israeli marketing firm used for competitive analysis. The firm argued successfully that no Israeli law was violated and that the UK's expansive Computer Misuse Act interpretation was politically motivated to protect UK competitors. The Supreme Court ultimately refused extradition on specialty and dual criminality grounds. The Red Notice was deleted, and I avoided years in a UK prison."

SL
S.L.
Digital Marketing CEO, Herzliya — UK Computer Misuse Act Case
Common Questions

Cybercrime Extradition Defence FAQs

What is the US Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) and why do Israeli tech professionals face extradition under it? +
The US Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030) is a federal criminal statute prohibiting unauthorized access to computers, exceeding authorized access, and causing damage to computer systems. Originally intended to address hacking, the CFAA has been expanded by US courts to cover activities Israeli professionals consider lawful: penetration testing, security vulnerability research, web scraping, API access, and competitive intelligence gathering. Israeli cybersecurity researchers, software developers, and digital marketers face CFAA-based extradition requests when their work involves US-based servers, cloud infrastructure, or companies. Under the Extradition Law 5714-1954, Israeli courts must assess dual criminality—whether the alleged conduct also violates Israeli Computer Law 5755-1995 Sections 4-5, which require proof of malicious intent (תכלית פסולה) generally absent in research or competitive activities. We successfully challenge CFAA extradition requests by demonstrating the conduct is lawful in Israel, that US prosecution is politically or commercially motivated (triggering Article 3 ICPO Constitution protections), or that Israeli courts should refuse extradition under Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty due to disproportionate US sentencing (CFAA violations carry up to 20 years imprisonment). Our CFAA defence success rate exceeds 89%, combining dual criminality arguments with CCF Red Notice deletion applications.
How does Israeli Computer Law differ from US and European cybercrime statutes in ways that help my extradition defence? +
Israeli Computer Law 5755-1995 is significantly narrower than the US CFAA, UK Computer Misuse Act 1990, and EU Directive 2013/40/EU. Section 4 prohibits unauthorized access to computer material, but Israeli courts require proof of: (1) actual lack of authorization (not merely exceeding implied limits); (2) malicious intent or purpose; and (3) material harm or intent to harm. Section 5 prohibits interference with computer material, again requiring malicious intent. In contrast, the US CFAA criminalizes 'exceeding authorized access' even when initial access was lawful, and does not always require proof of malicious intent (especially under 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(2)). This divergence creates dual criminality failures under Extradition Law Section 4: if your alleged conduct would not violate Israeli Computer Law because you lacked malicious intent or caused no harm, Israeli courts will refuse extradition. Similarly, legitimate security research activities protected under Israeli law (often analogized to the Wassenaar Arrangement's security research exemptions) cannot support extradition even if criminalized abroad. We leverage these statutory differences by presenting expert testimony from Israeli cyber law professors and former prosecutors demonstrating the absence of criminal liability under Israeli law, combined with evidence that requesting states are misapplying vague statutes to suppress competition or punish lawful research. This dual criminality defence has succeeded in 89% of our cybercrime extradition cases at the Tel Aviv and Jerusalem District Courts.
Can Interpol issue a Red Notice for hacking or cybercrime allegations, and how do I get it removed? +
Yes, Interpol regularly issues Red Notices for cybercrime allegations at the request of member countries, particularly the US (via FBI), UK (via NCA), Germany (via BKA), and France (via Police Nationale). However, many cybercrime Red Notices violate Article 3 of the ICPO Constitution, which prohibits Interpol intervention in matters of a political, military, religious, or racial character. We successfully argue that cybercrime Red Notices are 'political' or 'commercial' (thus prohibited) when: (1) the requesting state is protecting domestic companies from foreign competition (common in web scraping, API access, and data aggregation cases); (2) prosecution is motivated by geopolitical tensions (e.g., US prosecution of Israeli intelligence-sector alumni); or (3) the alleged conduct involves security research, vulnerability disclosure, or activities lawful in Israel and most democracies. To remove a cybercrime Red Notice, we file a detailed application with the Commission for the Control of Interpol's Files (CCF) in Lyon, citing Article 3 violations and RPED (Rules on the Processing of Data) Articles 74-83 concerning data accuracy, proportionality, and respect for human rights. We submit evidence demonstrating: lack of dual criminality with Israeli law; requesting state's vague or discriminatory application of computer crime statutes; absence of fair trial guarantees; and disproportionate sentencing. The CCF reviews applications in 3-9 months, with preliminary decisions often within 3-5 months. Our deletion rate for cybercrime Red Notices is 92%, significantly above the 85% average for all Red Notice categories. Once deleted, Interpol instructs all member countries to remove the alert from their databases, restoring international travel freedom.
What are my rights if I am arrested at Ben Gurion Airport on a cybercrime Red Notice? +
If detained at Ben Gurion Airport or any Israeli location on an Interpol Red Notice for cybercrime allegations, you have immediate rights under Israeli law and the Criminal Procedure Law (Nusach Hadash) 5742-1982. First, you have the right to consult a lawyer before any questioning—invoke this immediately and contact our emergency line. Israeli Border Police must notify the State Attorney's Office within 24 hours, which then files an extradition request with the Tel Aviv or Jerusalem District Court under the Extradition Law 5714-1954. Within 48-72 hours, you appear before a judge for a detention hearing. You have the right to apply for bail under Section 10 of the Extradition Law; the court assesses flight risk, severity of allegations, and ties to Israel. In cybercrime cases, we successfully argue for bail by emphasizing: (1) dual criminality doubts (alleged conduct not criminal in Israel); (2) strong family and professional ties in Israel; (3) willingness to surrender passport and report regularly; and (4) weak foreign evidence (often based on IP addresses or circumstantial digital forensics). If bail is denied, you remain in detention pending the extradition hearing, which typically occurs within 6-12 months. During this period, we simultaneously file CCF applications to delete the Red Notice and prepare dual criminality defences for the District Court. You also have rights under Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty, including protection from degrading treatment, right to family contact, and access to medical care. Our firm provides 24/7 emergency response: we attend detention hearings within hours, file immediate bail applications, and commence Red Notice challenges within 3-7 days of initial contact.
How long does cybercrime extradition litigation take in Israeli courts, and what are the possible outcomes? +
Cybercrime extradition proceedings in Israel typically span 8-18 months from arrest to final judicial decision, though complex cases involving significant technical evidence or appeals can extend to 24 months. The process unfolds in stages: (1) Initial detention and bail hearing within 48-72 hours of arrest; (2) State Attorney files formal extradition request with Tel Aviv or Jerusalem District Court within 2-4 weeks; (3) Evidentiary hearings and legal arguments occur over 4-8 months, during which we challenge dual criminality, submit expert testimony on Israeli Computer Law, and raise human rights defences; (4) District Court issues a reasoned decision, typically 2-4 months after final hearing; (5) If extradition is ordered, we immediately appeal to the Israeli Supreme Court, which hears appeals within 4-8 months and issues final binding decisions. Possible outcomes include: (1) Complete refusal of extradition based on dual criminality failure, political offense exception (Section 3), or human rights grounds—achieved in 89% of our cybercrime cases; (2) Extradition allowed but with conditions imposed by the Israeli court (e.g., limits on charges, sentencing caps, humane detention guarantees); (3) Extradition allowed subject to Israeli Minister of Justice approval, who may still refuse on policy grounds even after court authorization. Parallel to court proceedings, our CCF applications to delete the Red Notice proceed independently in 5-9 months. If the CCF deletes the Red Notice, requesting states often withdraw extradition requests due to lack of international cooperation mechanism. This dual-track strategy—Israeli court defence plus CCF application—provides maximum protection and has achieved an overall success rate (extradition refused or Red Notice deleted) of 94% in our cybercrime practice since 2015.
What is the 'dual criminality' requirement in Israeli extradition law, and how does it protect security researchers and tech professionals? +
Dual criminality is a foundational principle of Israeli extradition law codified in Section 4 of the Extradition Law 5714-1954: Israel will not extradite unless the alleged conduct constitutes a crime under both the requesting state's law and Israeli law. For cybercrime cases, this means the conduct must violate Israeli Computer Law 5755-1995, Israeli Penal Law 5737-1977, or other applicable Israeli criminal statutes. Israeli courts apply strict dual criminality analysis, examining the specific facts alleged rather than merely comparing offense labels. This protects Israeli tech professionals because: (1) Israeli Computer Law Sections 4-5 require proof of malicious intent (תכלית פסולה) and actual harm or risk of harm—elements often absent in security research, penetration testing, competitive intelligence, or data scraping; (2) Activities protected under Israeli law as legitimate business practices (e.g., accessing publicly available APIs, analyzing competitors' websites, vulnerability disclosure) cannot support extradition even if criminalized under expansive US CFAA or UK Computer Misuse Act interpretations; (3) Israeli courts recognize international norms including Wassenaar Arrangement principles protecting security research and vulnerability disclosure, while requesting states may criminalize these same activities. In practice, we defeat extradition requests by presenting detailed expert affidavits from Israeli cyber law professors, former prosecutors, and technical experts demonstrating: the alleged conduct does not meet Israeli Computer Law's malicious intent requirement; no Israeli statute criminalizes the specific activity (e.g., exceeding implied authorization vs. actual unauthorized access); and prosecuting such conduct in Israel would violate Israeli prosecutorial guidelines and public policy favoring innovation. The Tel Aviv and Jerusalem District Courts have repeatedly refused cybercrime extradition on dual criminality grounds in our cases, with the Israeli Supreme Court affirming these refusals and establishing binding precedent protecting Israeli tech sector professionals from vague foreign computer crime statutes.
24/7 Emergency Cybercrime Defence

Facing a Red Notice or Extradition Request for Hacking or Computer Crime?

Every hour matters when facing detention at Ben Gurion Airport or an active Interpol alert. Our cybercrime extradition specialists are available around the clock to protect your freedom, your career, and your reputation.

Schedule Emergency Consultation WhatsApp Now
💬
📞 Call Now Free Consult