Wed, December 01, 2021

business

Canadian Court Rejects HSBC Evidence in Meng Wanzhou’s Extradition Case as Lawyer Reiterates Unreliable Nature of US Accusation


On 1 December 2018, more than five years after the meeting, Ms. Meng was arrested at Vancouver airport because the US wanted her to stand trial on charges including fraud.

According to the record of the case (ROC) provided by the U.S.to the Canadian court, Ms. Meng was charged with fraud because of a PowerPoint presentation she made at the request of HSBC their director of global banking for the Asia Pacific region Alan Thomas, on August 22, 2013. And the ROC would be the basis on which the Canadian court will decide whether to extradite Ms. Meng to the US.

On 1 December 2018, more than five years after the meeting, Ms. Meng was arrested at Vancouver airport because the US wanted her to stand trial on charges including fraud.

According to the ROC, the key basis of the US’s allegation in this case is that HSBC, especially the bank’s senior management, had been unaware of Huawei’s relationship with Skycom and therefore could only assess the risks it was facing based on Ms. Meng’s PowerPoint presentation.

Presented by Meng’s legal team, the new evidence showed that the continuing nature of Skycom’s business with Huawei was not kept from senior HSBC executives; that internal HSBC risk-assessments were made based on knowledge of the true facts; and that any reputational risks were managed with the knowledge of senior HSBC executives.

According to Mark Sandler, lawyer of Meng, the new evidence consists of reliable, contemporaneous business records that show the records of case (ROC) presented by U.S. to the Canadian court are "so defective as to compel the court to place no reliance on them."

However, on June 9, the Canadian court ruled that it would not grant the introduction of the new documents in its entirety into the evidence of Meng’s extradition case.

As the defence team reemphasized, even though the court did not permit Meng to introduce additional evidence, it doesn’t mean the evidence doesn’t hold true. The new documents can prove clearly that two statements in the ROC, i.e. “HSBC executives were unaware of Huawei’s relationship with Skycom” and “HSBC relied on Meng Wanzhou’s PowerPoint presentation for decision-making”, are manifestly unreliable and have seriously misled the court.

According to the record of the case (ROC) provided by the U.S.to the Canadian court, Ms. Meng was charged with fraud because of a PowerPoint presentation she made at the request of HSBC their director of global banking for the Asia Pacific region Alan Thomas, on August 22, 2013. And the ROC would be the basis on which the Canadian court will decide whether to extradite Ms. Meng to the US.

On 1 December 2018, more than five years after the meeting, Ms. Meng was arrested at Vancouver airport because the US wanted her to stand trial on charges including fraud.

According to the ROC, the key basis of the US’s allegation in this case is that HSBC, especially the bank’s senior management, had been unaware of Huawei’s relationship with Skycom and therefore could only assess the risks it was facing based on Ms. Meng’s PowerPoint presentation.

Presented by Meng’s legal team, the new evidence showed that the continuing nature of Skycom’s business with Huawei was not kept from senior HSBC executives; that internal HSBC risk-assessments were made based on knowledge of the true facts; and that any reputational risks were managed with the knowledge of senior HSBC executives.

According to Mark Sandler, lawyer of Meng, the new evidence consists of reliable, contemporaneous business records that show the records of case (ROC) presented by U.S. to the Canadian court are "so defective as to compel the court to place no reliance on them."

However, on June 9, the Canadian court ruled that it would not grant the introduction of the new documents in its entirety into the evidence of Meng’s extradition case.

As the defence team reemphasized, even though the court did not permit Meng to introduce additional evidence, it doesn’t mean the evidence doesn’t hold true. The new documents can prove clearly that two statements in the ROC, i.e. “HSBC executives were unaware of Huawei’s relationship with Skycom” and “HSBC relied on Meng Wanzhou’s PowerPoint presentation for decision-making”, are manifestly unreliable and have seriously misled the court.

Meng’s case has long been dragged into the politics of the U.S.-China trade war and technology competition. Just days after her arrest in 2018, US former President Donald Trump said he could intervene in the case if it helped secured a trade deal with China. In May 2019, Steve Bannon, a former senior Trump adviser, said, “killing Huawei is 10 times more important than a trade deal with China.” As a market leader focusing on R&D and innovation, Huawei seems to become a politicized target in this super power competition.

“There is gross political interference in this case by the United States. Ms. Meng was nothing less than a pun in trade negotiations between the United States and China,” said Richard Kurland, attorney at law in the provinces of British Columbia and Quebec, Canada, “The reason why Canada couldn't do anything earlier is because of president Trump."

For the next step, Meng will attend the Committal stage of her extradition hearings, set to take place in August.

“The hearings will continue, and as always we support Ms Meng in her pursuit of justice and freedom,” said the Huawei Canada statement.

Published : July 12, 2021