Meng Wanzhou case has been the focus of the whole world since its development in early December. But why did the case arise? Where did Mengs crime come from?
On December 18, local time, a New York Times report analyzed some of the American calculations behind the Meng Wanzhou case.
On the afternoon of December 11, local time, Meng Wanzhou was released on bail.
The cause of her arrest was initiated a few years ago.
The New York Times said details of Mengs criminal charges had been filed and sealed, and were still unclear. But Canadian court documents and interviews with investigators familiar with Huawei indicate that the case that led to her arrest was initiated several years ago.
People familiar with the matter said the case stemmed from the Obama administrations national security investigation into Chinese companies, including Huawei. Only recently, the focus of the investigation has shifted to Huawei, especially Meng Wanzhou.
According to a former federal law enforcement official, anti-spy agents and federal prosecutors began investigating possible cases against Huaweis leadership in 2010. The work is led by the federal prosecutors office in Huawei, including Massachusetts, Alabama, California, New York and Texas.
The United States has been unjustifiably accusing China of threats to its national security. Before Huawei was blocked by many Western countries, the media disclosed that in July this year, the leaders of intelligence departments of the member countries of the Five Eye Alliance discussed together how to exclude Huawei from the 5G procurement list at a secret lobster dinner. But New Zealand, one of its members, denied it.
However, it is not easy to accuse Huawei executives of espionage or other security crimes. Then another entry point appeared.
Better to file a case on suspicion of bank fraud than on national security grounds.
The United States has accused Meng of fraudulently evading sanctions on Iran by trading with Iran through Huawei Skycom, a Hong Kong-based company, while concealing Huaweis relationship with Skycom. In addition, in the request for the temporary arrest of Meng, the United States also indicated that Meng and other Huawei representatives made false statements to a number of transnational financial institutions, including a financial institution operating in the United States.
The financial institutions mentioned above are considered to include HSBC.
According to the New York Times, although U.S. companies are legally prohibited from doing business with countries, individuals and institutions subject to U.S. sanctions, Huawei cannot be prohibited from doing so. However, if international banks like HSBC transfer funds to and from Iran through the United States, they may violate U.S. law.
At the same time, criminal charges against Huawei or its executives for espionage or other security crimes are not easy. Former federal prosecutors say, therefore, prosecutors often want to prosecute more traditional cases involving bank fraud and other crimes. This can be seen as an Al Capone strategy: prosecutors hunt down notorious gang members by accusing them of tax evasion.
Former federal prosecutors said that the pursuit of Mengs boat on the grounds of suspected bank fraud proved to be a better offensive route than trying to file a case on the grounds of national security.
Thus, this summer, the U.S. prosecution decided to institute criminal proceedings against Meng Wanzhou. On August 22, the prosecution filed a lawsuit in a sealed document, and a federal judge in Brooklyn signed a warrant authorizing the arrest of Meng Wanzhou.
The United States and Canada have extradition treaties. The United States also understands that Meng Late Boat often goes to Canada, and believes that it is only a matter of time before she goes there. So there was the arrest on December 1st.
The report also mentions that most of the charges against Meng Wanzhou by Canadian prosecutors came from a three-page letter sent to Canadian prosecutors by Brooklyn prosecutors on December 3. Documents submitted to the Court by the Canadian authorities depend heavily on materials provided by the United States.
Meng was released on bail on December 11, local time, and will appear again in court on February 6, 2019.
In accordance with the relevant procedures, the US side will submit an official extradition application within 60 days after Mengs arrest. The Canadian side will hold an extradition hearing 30 days after receiving the extradition documents. Mengs side will certainly defend and refuse to be extradited, which means that a court tug-of-war begins.
In response to the detention of Meng Wanzhou, China has been very resolute and tough. Foreign Ministry spokesman Lu Xuzeng said that the detention of Ms. Meng Wanzhou was a wrong move from the beginning. China has made clear to the Canadian and American governments our position that such mistakes should be corrected immediately and Ms. Meng Wanzhou released. Americans are well aware of Chinas position on the Meng Wanzhou incident. Any American personage, especially the leaders and senior figures of the US government, who are willing to make active efforts to push this matter to the right direction is certainly welcome.
Our Ambassador to Canada, Lusaye, published a signed article entitled We dont want to see Canada embark on a path that deviates from fairness and justice in the Canadian Globe Post on the 13th. He wrote: This incident is not a simple judicial case, but a premeditated political action. It is the political pursuit of a Chinese high-tech enterprise by the use of state power by the United States.
Source: Observer Network Responsible Editor: Luo Jiazhen_NBJS6445