Home » Lawyer for Meng Wanzhou’s “Procedural Abuse”: No evidence to support the defense | Extradition Case | Huawei Crisis

Lawyer for Meng Wanzhou’s “Procedural Abuse”: No evidence to support the defense | Extradition Case | Huawei Crisis

by admin

[NewTangDynastyBeijingtimeonAugust92021]The final round of the extradition case of Huawei “Princess” Meng Wanzhou is currently in the High Court of British Columbia, Canada. A few days ago, the third branch of the court debate on the defense’s accusation of “procedural abuse” by the US judiciary ended. Some Canadian lawyers pointed out that the defense did not provide any valid evidence to support the relevant allegations.

The debate on the “procedural abuse” proposed by the defense in the third branch of the court hearing in Vancouver on the extradition case of Meng Wanzhou ended on August 6, local time.

In this debate, Meng Wanzhou’s lawyer accused the U.S. judiciary of providing the Canadian side with “significant misunderstandings and omissions of facts,” which constituted a so-called “procedural abuse”.

The defense claimed that Meng Wanzhou’s presentation slide (PPT) statement to an HSBC executive in Hong Kong in August 2013 involved important information such as “Huawei controls Xingtong’s operations in Iran.” The relevant statement did not constitute a “misleading” issue of HSBC, but the US “selectively omitted” this part of the facts and distorted the facts.

The defense also alleged that in terms of settlement, HSBC could have other ways to avoid potential violation risks, but HSBC did not choose other ways, and the responsibility was not on Meng Wanzhou’s side. The defense used this as a reason to propose that the United States needs to stop the extradition process.

However, Canadian Justice Department lawyer Monika Rahman (Monika Rahman) pointed out that the above allegations made by Meng Wanzhou’s lawyers are not supported by evidence.

See also  Hard blow to the #MeToo movement in China: accusations of harassment against a well-known TV presenter rejected

Deutsche Welle’s Chinese website quoted Rahman’s analysis as saying that when the United States made an extradition request, it had a “very high” standard for the evidence it presented, and was quite cautious. However, Meng Wanzhou’s defense lawyers did not provide any valid and reliable evidence for the serious allegations they made.

In the coming weeks, Deputy Chief Justice Heather Holmes will hear the final argument on whether Meng Wanzhou should be extradited to the United States for trial.

The hearing on the extradition case of Meng Wanzhou has lasted for more than two years. From early March to early April this year, the prosecution and the defense have successively focused on the first branch of the issue of “procedural abuse” (that is, the issue of “political motivation” in this case), the second branch (that is, the issue of “illegal detention”), and the fourth branch ( That is, whether the U.S. extradition request violates customary international law) was debated in court. This round of court debates, which began on August 4, is about the third branch (that is, whether the US prosecutors “distorted the facts”) debate.

This round of court hearings will last until August 20. After the court defense of all four branches of “procedural abuse” is over, the hearing will be transferred to the remedial stage, and the court will discuss the judicial remedy claimed by the defense in the subsequent trial. After that, the court will hold a detention hearing to focus on the issue of the adequacy of the US evidence, and the defense will respond to the prosecution’s claim to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to prove that Meng Wanzhou can accept trial. It is widely expected that the Canadian courts will make a decision on this case in the fall.

See also  Toronto kills agent and injures two people: dies after shooting with police

A few days after Meng Wanzhou’s arrest in Canada, the National Security Agency of the Communist Party of China detained two Canadians-businessman Michael Spavor and former diplomat Michael Kovrig. The outside world believed that the CCP’s move was intended to be used. The two Canadians took hostages and forced Canada to unconditionally release Meng Wanzhou, which put the relationship between Beijing and Ottawa into a deadlock.

(Reporter He Yating Comprehensive Report / Chief Editor: Lin Qing)

The URL of this article: https://www.ntdtv.com/gb/2021/08/08/a103185728.html

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy