[ad_1]
South China morning post
Retired Canadian Police Officer Refuses to Testify at Meng Wanzhou Extradition Hearing
A retired Canadian police officer refuses to testify at Huawei Technologies executive Meng Wanzhou’s extradition hearing in Vancouver amid claims by Meng’s attorneys that Canadian authorities participated in an undercover data collection exercise. evidence against him at the behest of US law enforcement. A former Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) staff sergeant, has hired outside counsel and been advised not to appear at the hearings, which resumed in the British Columbia Supreme Court on Monday, the attorney said. Meng Chief Richard Peck to Associate Chief Justice Heather Holmes. The denial was “cause for some concern,” Peck said. Get the latest insights and analysis from our Global Impact newsletter on great stories originating from China. Chang participated in email conversations with Sherri Onks, the Vancouver legal attaché for the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, on Dec. 1, 2018, the day of Meng’s arrest, according to Meng’s lawyers. A call from “a Chinese minister” after Meng’s arrest, Meng’s lawyers say. Additionally, on Monday, the court heard that Meng may still be a permanent resident of Canada, despite his attempt to renounce that status 18 years ago. The resignation was redundant and had no legal force, according to an email from the Canadian border agency read in court. Meng’s legal team has been trying to show that border agents’ examination of Meng was unwarranted; Had Meng been identified as a permanent resident, it could have influenced whether that examination should have proceeded. Meng’s attorneys have described various interactions between RCMP officers and the FBI as evidence that Meng’s treatment on the day of his arrest at the Vancouver airport was meant to meet Meng, who is Huawei’s CFO and daughter of founder Ren Zhengfei, is accused by the US authorities of defrauding HSBC by lying about Huawei’s business in Iran, exposing the bank to the risk of violate the rules of US sanctions in the Middle Eastern country. Meng denies the charges. The border agent says giving Meng’s passwords to the police is a “heartbreaking” mistake. Chang had said in an affidavit that he “believes” that the FBI requested “identifying information of the seized electronic devices from Ms. Meng.” But he also said in the affidavit that “[as] I was never asked for identification information by [any] member of the FBI, or any other member of any other authority in the United States, this information was never shared. “Meng’s attorneys called this a” repetitive denial. “Chang did not explain where his initial” belief “about a At the FBI’s request, Meng was searched and questioned by the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) and her electronic devices were seized within three hours of her arrest by the RCMP; that delay was in defiance of a court order that said she should be arrested “immediately,” her lawyers say. This, they argue, was an abuse of process and of Meng’s rights in the Canadian letter; therefore, they contend, the United States’ request that she be extradited to New York to going to trial for fraud should be rejected as a result.In October, the British Columbia Supreme Court heard testimony from a number of witnesses, including the RCMP officer who arrested her, and a or from the CBSA officers who conducted the disputed border examination and confiscated their electronic devices and passwords. That CBSA officer, Scott Kirkland, had told the court that he passed a note with Meng’s passwords to the RCMP in error, a violation of Canadian privacy law. It was, he said, an “embarrassing” and “heartbreaking” mistake. Meng’s deal since arriving in Canada nearly two years ago has enraged Beijing, causing China’s relations with Canada and the United States to spiral downward. Shortly after his arrest. Beijing arrested Canadians Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, accusing them of espionage. In Canada, his situation is seen as retaliatory action, his arrest is considered hostage-taking. Meng is under partial house arrest in Vancouver, and lives in one of his two houses in the city. His extradition procedures are expected to last until next year, but appeals could take the process much longer. Also, on Monday, a Canadian border officer was questioned by another of Meng’s attorneys, Mona Duckett, when witness testimony resumed. CBSA Superintendent Bryce McRae testified last month that prior to the day Meng arrived at the Vancouver airport and was arrested, he did not know she was on her way to Canada. On Monday, Huawei’s Meng wins a small victory in the quest to overturn the US extradition. McRae described his attempts on December 1, 2018 to determine whether Meng was still a permanent resident of Canada, a status he obtained in 2001 but which he attempted to resign the following year. Duckett cited CBSA activity logs for that day as stating that a superintendent at the airport “was unable to determine the status of the subject” and was seeking assistance from Ottawa in doing so. McRae acknowledged that he was the superintendent and that the subject was Meng. Duckett then cited an internal CBSA email dated December 5, 2018, which concluded that Meng was believed to still be a permanent resident. base, and “therefore the customer is a PR,” Duckett said, reading from the email, which did not list McRae as a correspondent. The “voluntary resignation process” – carried out by Meng from June 28, 2002 to November of that year – had occurred under redundant rules and therefore had “no legal effect” on Meng’s status, McRae said. , reading the same email. Canada border officer slaps Meng Wanzhou’s claim of undercover plot CBSA Superintendent Sanjit Dhillon, one of the officers who questioned Meng, was next on the stand, who told crown attorney Diba Majzub , representing the interests of the United States in the case, who had concerns that day that the fact that there was a warrant for Meng’s arrest suggested that she might have been inadmissible in Canada on criminal grounds. This concern about crime, while not “final,” was the basis for Meng’s border review, Dhillon said. examination, he read about Meng and Huawei on Wikipedia, including “espionage and security concerns.” When Meng wanted to know why his exam was taking so long, Dhillon “chimed in” with questions about Huawei. “I asked her what she did at work … just to make her feel comfortable,” she said. He then asked where Huawei sold its products as a way to tackle the problem of espionage. Finally, Meng said that “security concerns” prevented the sale of Huawei products in the US Dhillon denied that anyone asked him to ask Meng these questions. In an earlier affidavit, Dhillon said that he also asked Meng if Huawei sold products in Iran. The hearing was postponed until Tuesday. In a statement released Monday afternoon, Huawei Canada said last month’s hearings had “revealed important information about the details of Meng Wanzhou’s arrest and the motivation behind it.” “Huawei continues to have great confidence both in the innocence of Ms. Meng and in the integrity of the Canadian judicial system. The truth is coming out,” he said. More from the South China Morning Post: * Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou’s extradition hearing to resume in Canada * Canada border officer says giving police passwords to Meng Wanzhou device was’ embarrassing and heartbreaking mistake ‘* A court in Canada investigates pro-China YouTuber video on Meng Wanzhou’ trial ‘doing Donald Trump’s’ dirty work’ Wanzhou extradition hearing first appeared on South China Morning Post For the latest news from the South China Morning Post, download our mobile app. Copyright 2020.
