Detention of Meng Wanzhou - CFO of Huawei

823 posts / 0 new
Last post
laine lowe laine lowe's picture

I never understood why Canada was so quick to do US' bidding on the etradition request.

Unionist

laine lowe wrote:

I never understood why Canada was so quick to do US' bidding on the etradition request.

Chrystia Freeland.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

I do dislike her immensely. I so disagree with Canada's current treatment of Venezuela and many of the other neo-right foreign policies she has ushered through or maintained from the Harper era.

Unionist

laine lowe wrote:

I do dislike her immensely. I so disagree with Canada's current treatment of Venezuela and many of the other neo-right foreign policies she has ushered through or maintained from the Harper era.

I have never blamed her for having a Nazi grandfather. I do blame her for: 1) spending decades denying it, and painting him as a "political exile" and champion of "Ukrainian independence". 2) Following in his footsteps in opposing the liberation struggles of the people of the world. She seriously needs her sorry ass dragged in front of a war crimes tribunal. Likewise with her slavish admirer, Justin Trudeau.

Unionist

China considering halting all meat products from Canada over fake veterinary health certificates

Quote:

China is considering halting all meat imports from Canada starting Wednesday after the Canadian Food Inspection Agency notified China that it had discovered a number of inauthentic veterinary health certificates in some meat products bound for China, according to a government official.

 

NDPP

Losing Canada's second largest trading partner is yet another downside of electing a government that can't say no to Warshington. On the bright side none of the other possibile choices available to Canuckleheads probably would either.

Pondering

Uh, we are between the US and China, rock and a hard place. Between the two we are far more dependent on the US. The US was probably happy to let us keep their draft dodgers. Trump would have had a fit if we refuse to even go to court on Meng. Letting the process play out in the courts is the right course of action. 

NDPP

China Urges Canada to 'Take Concerns Seriously' And Release Meng Wanzhou

https://globalnews.ca/news/5432507/china-renews-demands-canada-wanzhou/

"China renewed a demand that Canada release a top executive of tech giant Huawei a day after announcing a suspension of all imports of Canadian meat products in China..."

 

What is Ractopamine, the Drug at the Centre of the China-Canada Meat Dispute?

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/what-is-ractopamine-the-drug-at-the-centre...

"...Ractopamine is not permitted in the European Union, Taiwan and Russia. The EU banned the drug citing 'weaknesses in data.' Health Canada says there is no evidence that the drug is unsafe for consumers. The US has adopted the same stance. But China disagrees and believes ractopamine and other drugs in the beta-agonist family are unsafe. Some reports suggest that the drugs can have an effect on the cardiovascular system.

Chinese officials have publicly maintained that the actions the country has taken against Canadian canola and meat are not connected to May's arrest in any way."

Unionist

Pondering wrote:

Uh, we are between the US and China, rock and a hard place. Between the two we are far more dependent on the US. The US was probably happy to let us keep their draft dodgers. Trump would have had a fit if we refuse to even go to court on Meng. Letting the process play out in the courts is the right course of action. 

The charges against her would be considered a joke in Canada - misleading U.S. bankers 6 years ago via a PowerPoint presentation into believing that Huawei had divested from a company which was doing business with Iran. That's the charge. Seriously.

I also disagree that Canada should be guided in this matter by "whom do we need more as an ally/trading partner?"

I do believe in the "rule of law". Even though it seems odd that "the law" in this case amounts to a bilateral treaty to which China isn't even a party.

The Canadian government is bound by the Extradition Act. Section 23(3) provides as follows:

Quote:

Withdrawal of the authority to proceed

(3) The Minister may at any time withdraw the authority to proceed and, if the Minister does so, the court shall discharge the person and set aside any order made respecting their judicial interim release or detention.

The Minister in question (who is the Minister of Justice) should act, immediately, in accordance with that section and order Meng to be released and all proceedings halted. A profuse apology by the Prime Minister would also be in order, but that's up to him.

That's what the "rule of law" means.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The Chinese have a case for banning our meat since it seems some of the product was being exported with fake certificates saying it was Ractopamine free. The rule of law in Canada seems to include a certification system that is either corrupt or easily circumvented. This article is full of great facts about the drug and the meat industry. If the same product had been sent into Europe and discovered it would have led to action against the companies involved. Before China did a blanket ban they banned a couple of producers for exporting pork to China that was contaminated with Ractopamine.

So why does China have a beef with our meat?

According to Chinese officials, Chinese customs authorities discovered residue of the additive ractopamine in a batch of pork products exported from Canada to China, which has banned the substance.

When Chinese authorities advised Canada of the finding on June 14, it raised a red flag for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), which asked to review the export certificate.

Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau says the RCMP has been called in to investigate the origins of a pork shipment to China that arrived with a fake Canadian export certificate. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)

Upon examination, CFIA inspectors confirmed the certificate was inauthentic.

Canada’s Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau told CBC News that the suspect pork shipments and certificates are unlikely Canadian, but were being misrepresented as such. She also said the RCMP and Canada Border Services Agency are both now investigating.

https://easternontarionetwork.com/2019/06/27/why-china-has-a-beef-with-c...

Pondering

Unionist wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Uh, we are between the US and China, rock and a hard place. Between the two we are far more dependent on the US. The US was probably happy to let us keep their draft dodgers. Trump would have had a fit if we refuse to even go to court on Meng. Letting the process play out in the courts is the right course of action. 

The charges against her would be considered a joke in Canada - misleading U.S. bankers 6 years ago via a PowerPoint presentation into believing that Huawei had divested from a company which was doing business with Iran. That's the charge. Seriously.

I also disagree that Canada should be guided in this matter by "whom do we need more as an ally/trading partner?"

I do believe in the "rule of law". Even though it seems odd that "the law" in this case amounts to a bilateral treaty to which China isn't even a party.

The Canadian government is bound by the Extradition Act. Section 23(3) provides as follows:

Quote:

Withdrawal of the authority to proceed

(3) The Minister may at any time withdraw the authority to proceed and, if the Minister does so, the court shall discharge the person and set aside any order made respecting their judicial interim release or detention.

The Minister in question (who is the Minister of Justice) should act, immediately, in accordance with that section and order Meng to be released and all proceedings halted. A profuse apology by the Prime Minister would also be in order, but that's up to him.

That's what the "rule of law" means.

"May" not "must" meaning it is fine to allow the courts to decide. If you are correct the courts will release her and Canada will respect the decision. That too is the rule of law. 

Were Trudeau to intervene it would be politically motivated and so is not interfering. 

Unionist

Pondering wrote:

"May" not "must" meaning it is fine to allow the courts to decide.

Yes, thanks, I'm capable of reading. David Lametti may release her or he may not. My suggestion is that he withdraw all the proceedings and release her. Acting as rent-a-cop for Donald Trump when she was changing flights at Vancouver airport was a scandalous act, thinly dressed up as the "rule of law".

Quote:

If you are correct the courts will release her and Canada will respect the decision. That too is the rule of law.

I have no idea what the courts will do. I never said I was "correct". I stated my opinion as to how a civilized nation should act (hint: not the way we acted). And even if the courts find in her favour, she will remain detained (on bail or not) for years. That is scandalous and uncivilized.

Quote:

Were Trudeau to intervene it would be politically motivated and so is not interfering. 

The decision is up to David Lametti. Read the Extradition Act, please.

NDPP

China Warns Canada Not To Be 'Naive' in Thinking Allies Can Help Fix Issues [Especially the one that put you there]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/china-canada-trump-naive-1.5198249

"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told reporters Tuesday that he was 'confident' US President Donald Trump brought up the case of the two detained Canadians during talks with China's Xi Jinping. Trump said on Saturday he did not talk with Xi about the extradition case..."

Oh well. At least he wears interesting socks.

https://youtu.be/PJzODVBZzpo

WWWTT

Thanks for the link NDPP!
Justin appears very uncomfortable in the role as PM. He’s only good for taking pictures in staged photo opps. Actual intellect diplomacy and sincere desire at statesmanship are all beyond his grasp.
I can’t see this guy getting re-elected pm?

NDPP

'The Trudeau Government Will Do Anything To Keep Donald Trump Happy

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/alberta-diary/2019/06/trudeau-government...

"From the sublime to the ridiculous, it would appear Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government will do anything to keep Donald Trump sweet...we're now at the point we try to anticipate his every likely whim in advance, the better to preserve the USMCA, the NAFTA, or whatever our corporate rights agreement with the US is called this week. This is just pathetic...

Meng of course is the executive for Chinese electronics giant and alleged security threat Huawei who we've been obediently holding captive since last year because the Trump administration wants to use her as a bargaining chip in its ongoing trade war with China. Oh no, it's all about the rule of law, our treaties with the US and the fact Huawei was selling electronic widgets to Iran you say?

Please! The previous paragraph is an accurate summary of the explanation given by President Trump himself of the US demand we extradite Meng to a kangaroo trial and a predetermined prison sentence, followed by, perhaps, repatriation in the event the Chinese fully knuckle under to the art of the deal. You can believe the pious pish-posh about treaty obligations if you like, but you have to agree that Meng's lawyers were onto something when they wrote Justice Minister David Lametti on Monday arguing the case against her is 'palpably' political..."

contrarianna

Unionist wrote:

Pondering wrote:

"May" not "must" meaning it is fine to allow the courts to decide.

Yes, thanks, I'm capable of reading. David Lametti may release her or he may not. My suggestion is that he withdraw all the proceedings and release her. Acting as rent-a-cop for Donald Trump when she was changing flights at Vancouver airport was a scandalous act, thinly dressed up as the "rule of law".

Quote:

If you are correct the courts will release her and Canada will respect the decision. That too is the rule of law.

I have no idea what the courts will do. I never said I was "correct". I stated my opinion as to how a civilized nation should act (hint: not the way we acted). And even if the courts find in her favour, she will remain detained (on bail or not) for years. That is scandalous and uncivilized.

Quote:

Were Trudeau to intervene it would be politically motivated and so is not interfering. 

The decision is up to David Lametti. Read the Extradition Act, please.

Quite right, Unionist. 

The "Rule of Law" does not even exist in some pristine vacuum of impartial fairness when nation states interests are involved. 

Law is the handmaiden of state politics  and it's application is codified as such.

Thomas Walkin, one of the last of the decent writers for the Toronto Star, put it thus: 

Throughout, the Trudeau government’s position has been that it is merely following the rule of law. But Canada’s extradition law allows the government great discretion.

While the law requires a judicial hearing to consider any extradition request, it leaves the final decision on that request to the federal justice minister. Even if a judge rules the extradition request acceptable, the minister can legally [note: "legally" entails the "Rule of Law"] overturn the decision.

The law is written this way in recognition of the fact that foreign relations, including extradition requests, are ultimately part of the political domain.

In short, when the Trudeau government cites adherence to the rule of law as justification for not involving itself in the Meng case, it is not being entirely accurate. The law specifically allows political involvement. The Chinese understand this, which is why they are so irked. The only Canadian government official who seemed to understand this was former ambassador to China John McCallum. He was fired for his troubles.

All of this could have been handled differently. Trudeau says he was notified ahead of Meng’s arrest that she would be detained while changing planes at Vancouver airport. His government could have legally intervened at that point and nipped the crisis in the bud.

Who knows how the U.S. would have reacted then?... 

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2019/06/27/too-late-for-...

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

I agree with Unionist and contrarianna. This extadition request smelled extremely political from the start, and could have been refused immediately on that ground. Although if I were PM (a bizarre thought) I would have pretended we incompetently failed to make the arrest. Only days later, Trump confirmed the political nature of the arrest, saying that he might intervene in the case if China gave him what he wanted on trade. At that point it would have been legally impeccable for Canada to release Meng. The fact that we didn't is very embarrassing.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Michael Moriarity wrote:

I agree with Unionist and contrarianna. This extadition request smelled extremely political from the start, and could have been refused immediately on that ground. Although if I were PM (a bizarre thought) I would have pretended we incompetently failed to make the arrest. Only days later, Trump confirmed the political nature of the arrest, saying that he might intervene in the case if China gave him what he wanted on trade. At that point it would have been legally impeccable for Canada to release Meng. The fact that we didn't is very embarrassing.

This nails it including the idea of just saying we screwed up. The best thing diplomatically would have been to have someone with connections warn her before she boarded the flight.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

This nails it including the idea of just saying we screwed up. The best thing diplomatically would have been to have someone with connections warn her before she boarded the flight.

That would have been even better. Make it a story that never happened.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

Not to rub salt in the wound, but where was Jody Wilson-Raybould's input in these events?

NDPP

US vs China: Smartphone Wars

https://journal-neo.org/2019/07/05/us-vs-china-smartphone-wars/

"If Washington's goal was to pressure and isolate China by targeting smartphone giant Huawei, it seems to have accomplished the exact opposite. In the process, the US has only accomplished in exposing its own growing weakness and unreliability as a trade partner and a much wider, misguided and mismanaged 'trade war'.

In efforts to isolate China, the US may be succeeding in only isolating itself. Other nations needed little imagination to realise that if the US could target Chinese companies simply for outcompeting American corporations, they could easily find themselves next..."

Unionist

laine lowe wrote:

Not to rub salt in the wound, but where was Jody Wilson-Raybould's input in these events?

She strongly upholds the rule of law. In this case, that meant arresting Meng at the behest of the U.S., and not using her statutory power under the Extradition Act to say, "let her change planes and carry on with her life".

Thus saving Trump and his minions from having to do the usual, viz. kidnap Meng and incarcerate her in Guantanamo.

Pages