Slashdot Mirror
Canada Allows US Extradition of Huawei CFO To Proceed (reuters.com)
The Canadian government has allowed for the extradition proceedings against the CFO of Huawei to proceed. "Today, department of Justice Canada officials issued an authority to proceed, formally commencing an extradition process in the case of Ms. Meng Wanzhou," the government said in a statement. Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Canada in December at the request of American authorities, who allege that she violated U.S. sanctions against Iran. From the report: China, whose relations with Canada have deteriorated badly over the affair, denounced the decision and repeated previous demands for Meng's release. Legal experts had predicted Ottawa would give the go-ahead for extradition proceedings, given the close judicial relationship between Canada and the United States. It could be years though before Meng is ever sent to the United States, since Canada's slow-moving justice system allows many decisions to be appealed. Meng's lawyers said they were disappointed and described the U.S. charges as politically motivated.
We definitely shouldn't take any actions that make China unhappy.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
If you always do what the bully wants, you'll always be bullied.
Canada has treated Meng very humanely and by all appearances followed the letter of the law. China should look at Canada as an exemplar.
They know it's the US just using her as leverage in the trade negotiations. It won't work of course.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
China's right on about this being a political maneuver regardless of whose responsible for said actions. China's relationship and companies thereof are outside the law of the US and Canada's jurisdiction. The US has no legitimate jurisdictional authority here and neither does Canada.
I don't have an opinion on who is in the right here, and who should prevail. This may very well be a political maneuver on the part of the US. However, I think that the US position is tenable. Let me explain why.
The US claims that Huawei, through its wholly-owned subsidiary Skycom, made misrepresentations to US-based financial firms about its activities in Iran that were in violation of US law. The US Justice and Treasury Departments announced they were investigating Huawei in April 2018.
In December 2018, Huawei's vice-chair and CFO Meng Wanzhou was arrested in Vancouver, Canada, at the request of the US. By entering a country that had an extradition treaty with the US, she imperiled herself. Canada then had to: (a) decide whether to hold an extradition hearing; (b) hold one if they decide to do so; and (c) extradite Meng Wanzhou if the hearing concludes with that decision. Canada just finished part (a).
If the argument is accepted that they do have jurisdictional authority then the US and Canada should be extraditing people to China to face charges who have never stepped foot in China for breaking a variety of laws that exist in China but that don't exist here despite people in the US breaking said Chinese laws having never even been to China.
I can accept that the US has jurisdictional authority over crimes committed within the US. And by engaging with US firms in an alleged fraudulent way, Skycom placed itself in that jurisdiction.
I suppose it could be the same if a US or Canadian person broke a Chinese law when engaging with a Chinese company. But that person would need to travel to China (or a country with an extradition treaty with China) to be subject to arrest and extradition. China has extradition treaties with about 40 countries. The US is not one of them.
Do we extradite gay people to Iran to face charges there because they interacted with someone on the internet in Iran that broke laws against homosexuality in Iran?
No, because: (a) the US and Iran do not have an extradition treaty; and (b) even if they did, there is no certainty that an extradition hearing would even happen, or if it did, that the person would be extradited. That's how extraditions work. They're not automatic. The country holding the prisoner has to decide.
On the other hand, if such a person were to travel to Iran, or to a country with an extradition treaty with Iran, I can imagine they could be arrested.
This is the kind of bullshit you get when you ignore jurisdictional boundaries and the rights of other nations and there companies to free trade. The US is being the bully here and Canada's actions are demonstrating it is an accomplice.
I don't think anyone is ignoring jurisdictional boundaries here. If Skycom had not done its banking with a US firm, I think the US would not have a tenable position.
I am reminded of an incident that happened a few years ago. A US citizen (I think) wrote something online that insulted the royalty of another country (Thailand IIRC). That US citizen subsequently went to Thailand as a tourist, and was arrested at the port of entry. I'm not sure how the case ended.
TL/DR: traveler beware. Unpleasant things can happen when your travels put you in reach of the authorities of another country who thinks you did something wrong.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
activities in Iran that were in violation of US law.
Right there I have a problem with this. The U.S. has no jurisdiction over actions in Iran by a non American company and non American citizens.
activities in Iran that were in violation of US law.
Right there I have a problem with this. The U.S. has no jurisdiction over actions in Iran by a non American company and non American citizens.
Arguably the US does if the non-American company involves American companies by misrepresenting their intentions. Which is what Justice and Treasury allege that Huawei/Skycom did. The "stepped a foot" as it were, into the US, and thus exposed themselves to US jurisdiction.
Again, I'm not sure of the merits of the case against Huawei. I just think the US position is tenable, though it's to be determined whether it will endure the processes that will unfold from here.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.