孟晚舟引渡案: 2018年12月1日被拘捕；2019年3月1日，加正式启动引渡程序；BC最高法院引渡听证2021年8月18日结束，法官未作出裁决；9月24日孟晚舟与美国政府达成协议，美国撤销引渡请求，BC法院终止引渡程序; 2022年12月1日美国撤销指控

[uglyducking]

问：...？

　　答：...。

　　....

 

[向问天]

2019年1月29日外交部发言人耿爽主持例行记者会

来源： 外交部网站 2019-01-29

　　问：....？

　　答：....。

　　问：美方公布了指控华为的具体证据，包括电邮、采访以及从电子设备采集的证据。中方是否认为此案纯属捏造？

　　答：关于美国司法部起诉华为公司以及孟晚舟女士，我在今天上午已经作出了回应。我想你可能已经注意到了，华为公司也已经作出了回应。

　　我想重申，中国政府一贯要求中国企业在依法合规的基础上开展对外经济合作，同时我们也要求各国为中国企业的正常运营提供公平、公正、非歧视的环境。

　　一段时间以来，美方动用国家力量抹黑和打压特定的中国企业，企图扼杀企业的正当合法经营，背后有很强的政治企图和政治操弄。我们强烈敦促美方停止对包括华为在内中国企业的无理打压，客观公正地对待中国企业。中方也将坚决捍卫中国企业的合法、正当权益。

　　问：...？

　　答：....。

　　问：关于美国对华为提起诉讼，你是否认为这将影响或损害本周在华盛顿举行的中美经贸磋商？

　　答：如果我没有记错的话，前一段时间我的同事回答过类似问题。在孟晚舟案以及华为公司问题上，中方已经多次阐明立场，我想美方对此是非常清楚的。

　　关于中美经贸磋商，中方也多次阐明立场，美方对此也是非常清楚的。

　　问：....？

　　答：....。

　　问：中方认为针对华为和孟晚舟的案件是政治性的，但美方认为针对华为和孟晚舟的有关指控是基于合理细节的法律案件。中方是否仍然认为这些是政治事件？如果是的话，中方的理由是什么？

　　答：我刚才回答那位记者提问时已经说过了，一段时间以来，美方动用国家力量抹黑和打压特定的中国企业，企图扼杀企业的正当合法经营，背后有很强的政治企图和政治操弄。中方的立场已经表达得很清楚了。

　　我建议你去关注一下华为公司今天上午作出的回应，我理解华为方面否认了美方对它的所有指控。

　　问：据报道，美国已正式向加拿大提出引渡孟晚舟的请求，中方对此有何评论？

　　答：关于美国司法部对华为公司及孟晚舟等提出起诉，我今天上午已经作出了回应。

　　关于美方向加方正式提出引渡孟晚舟的请求，中方已在第一时间分别向美方和加方提出了严正交涉。中方对美方不顾中方严正交涉，执意向加方提出引渡要求表示强烈不满和坚决反对。

　　我们再次敦促美方立即撤销对孟晚舟女士的逮捕令及正式引渡要求，同时敦促加方认真对待中方严正立场，立即释放孟晚舟女士并切实保障她的合法、正当权益，不要为美火中取栗。

　　问：...？

　　答：...。

　　问：中方的经贸代表团应该已经抵达华盛顿，会不会同美方谈到孟晚舟案件？

　　答：中方已经就中美经贸磋商对外发了消息。我们希望中美双方经贸团队能够按照两国领导人达成的重要共识，积极努力、相向而行，争取达成一个双方都能接受的解决方案，这也是国际社会的共同期待。

　　问：...？

　　答：...。

　　....

以前中共反复说，西方帝国主义忘我之心不死。
很多人不信，现在很多人信了。

 

[cathlethorpe]

　 加拿大法院接纳孟晚舟律师的要求，将听证保释会推迟至3月6日举行。韩媒认为，这是加拿大的缓兵之计，意在拖延时间，为决定是否同意引渡孟晚舟争取考虑时间

 

[ccc]

　 加拿大法院接纳孟晚舟律师的要求，将听证保释会推迟至3月6日举行。韩媒认为，这是加拿大的缓兵之计，意在拖延时间，为决定是否同意引渡孟晚舟争取考虑时间

将听证保释会推迟至3月6日举行?

 

[ccc]

 

[ccc]

 

[ccc]

 

[ccc]

For those who've been watching tech giant Huawei's business dealings and reporting on Canadian-Chinese relations for years, the political fallout after the arrest of the company's chief financial officer is concerning — but not unexpected.

Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou, who was arrested in Vancouver last month, faces 13 criminal charges in the United States for alleged violations of international trade sanctions against Iran.

American prosecutors are seeking her extradition while she remains under partial house arrest in Vancouver.

"It's unusual for the U.S. to try to arrest a high level executive of a foreign company," said Steve Stecklow, an investigative reporter for Reuters who initially broke the story of Huawei's dealings in Iran six years ago.

"It's not surprising that the Chinese are not happy about this at all."

Camera crews stake out the home of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou. She is currently under partial house arrest in Vancouver. (Yvette Brend/CBC)

'Champion in China'

Stecklow describes Huawei as a "champion" in China because of how quickly it's grown, surpassing Apple to become the world's second largest smartphone maker behind Samsung.

Stecklow was working on a series of stories in 2012 about how companies were trying to get around U.S. sanctions on Iran when he started looking into Huawei.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...r-court-for-bail-adjustment-hearing-1.4997235

He found the company had a partner in Iran called Skycom, although Wanzhou denied the connection.

"My first story showed Skycom was attempting to sell U.S. [computer] equipment to Iran, which was clearly under sanctions at the time," he told Stephen Quinn, the host of CBC's The Early Edition.

"It's clear that the stories played a key role in her arrest and the case against her."

Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou leaves her home to attend a court appearance regarding her bail conditions in Vancouver on Tuesday, Jan. 29, 2019. (Darryl Dyck/THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Banking firm HSBC, assured by Wanzhou the two companies weren't connected, continued to clear hundreds of millions of dollars in transactions from Iran.

"It put HSBC at tremendous risk, because they were under some court agreement not to violate sanctions with Iran," Stecklow said.

"So, she's essentially accused of of bank fraud and conspiracy to commit bank fraud by misrepresenting Huawei's relationship with Skycom to the banks."

Political ramifications

But China is painting Meng as a political prisoner rather than criminal and, in a government statement, urged the U.S. to withdraw the arrest warrant.

Jonathan Manthorpe, who covered China for two decades between 1993 and 2013 for the Vancouver Sun and Postmedia, said the case is having a hugely detrimental impact on Canada-Chinese relations.

"This is the worst crisis in our relationship with China we've had since 1970, when we began formal diplomatic relations with the People's Republic of China," Manthorpe said.

"We've got a long process ahead of us of rebuilding a more realistic relationship with China."

Wanzhou's next court date on March 6 will assess whether Canada has the authority to go ahead with the U.S. extradition request.

"It's ever more important that we allow the judicial process to go forward and to affirm to China and, indeed, to the United States at this point, that we have an independent judiciary that follows the rule of law," Manthorpe said.

 

[ccc]

The arrest of Huawei’s CFO, Meng Wanzhou, by Canadian authorities at the request of Washington has caused a deepening diplomatic crisis between Canada and China.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his ministers have insisted that Canada follows the rule of law and the judicial process will run its course without political interference.

Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou, who is out on bail and remains under partial house arrest after she was detained Dec. 1 at the behest of American authorities, leaves her home to attend a court appearance regarding her bail conditions, in Vancouver a week ago. (DARRYL DYCK / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Meanwhile, Canada is facing mounting pressure from Beijing as two Canadians are being held in China on unspecified violation of national security charges and another is one appealing his death sentence on charges of drug trafficking.

Now that the U.S. official extradition request is in place, it is time for Canada to have a clear look at the nature of the case and assert its judicial independence by not surrendering Meng to the U.S.

First, as former foreign minister John Manley pointed out, this case has nothing to do with the rule of law. It is Washington using Canada in abusing the extradition process between the two countries.

There are many corporate misconducts in global business transactions and most of them are dealt with through civil lawsuits.

Rarely is a senior executive of a company singled out to be responsible, let alone being personally charged, in a criminal proceeding.

When it comes to violations of U.S. sanctions against Iran by Chinese enterprises, the U.S. Department of Commerce litigated against a large Chinese telecommunications firm ZTE through a civil procedure last year and the two sides were able to reach an agreement.

It is unprecedented, and the evidence associated with such a dramatic escalation so far looks weak.

Second, it is no secret that the arrest and extradition request of Meng is the result of a long U.S. effort in trying to find out if Huawei, through its presence in the U.S. market, is a threat to its national security.

It is the U.S. National Security Agency that hacked into the Huawei system and left backdoors to spy on its corporate activities.

Even without clear conclusions, the U.S. government has banned Huawei in the U.S. and is pressing its allies, including Canada, to do the same, especially in the next-generation 5G networks.

Meng’s case cannot be separated from the fact that Huawei is not only perceived as a national security threat but also a competitor to the U.S. domination in one of the most critical high-tech areas.

Third, President Donald Trump has openly discussed the Meng case not as a pure legal procedure but an explicit bargaining tool in the ongoing U.S.-China trade dispute.

He indicated that if the U.S. got a better deal with China, then he would intervene in the case.

Although U.S. Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross stated that the extradition of Meng is separate from the U.S.-China trade talks, Trump has not given such a commitment and he is the only person who has the authority to intervene.

All of the above points to one critical condition that the extradition request shall be rejected by Canada: Strong evidence that Meng is being sought by the U.S. for “a political offence or an offence of a political character.” (Extradition Act 46(1)[c])

If the Canadian judicial process reaches such a conclusion, it will not be a result of caving into the Chinese demand, but a proclamation of its own independence.

The United States then will learn a lesson that it should not subject its bilateral extradition arrangement with Canada to great power politics.

The right path to address the issue of Huawei as a security threat, or as a high-tech competitor, is for Canada and the U.S. to engage in close strategic and security consultations and reach an agreement as to whether Huawei should be banned from Canada’s 5G networks.

 

[ccc]

If a Canadian court finds the extradition request in accord with our extradition treaty with the U.S., then Meng Wanzhou should be extradited. This process will involve a determining if she has been validly charged with crimes covered by that treaty.

In the meantime, and again pursuant to Canadian due process, she has been released on bail and serves house arrest. So, while China fumes, Meng lolls about her expansive, mountain-view home in Vancouver.

Meng Wanzhou, CFO of Huawei Technologies, leaves her home while out on bail in Vancouver on Jan. 10. (Ben Nelms / Bloomberg)

Our Canadians, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, however, are incarcerated for an indefinite period in cells lit 24 hours, subjected to interrogation and with limited access to counsel. Held under dubious charges, they are being used as bargaining chips. We can lament how Canada got caught between the U.S. and China, but as a nation, our next steps are clear. Due process must play out and our laws applied. Here, we follow the rule-of-law.

Ultimately, the Canadian government has wide discretion under the Extradition Act to refuse to surrender someone where it would be unjust or oppressive to do so. However, the mounting evidence of misdeeds detailed in last week’s filings in the U.S., make that an unlikely finding. To roll over and yield to China’s blunt threats and crude actions could hold great consequences for Canada.

By detaining Canadians and holding them hostage, China has made this about more than Meng. China is using Canada to teach a lesson to the world. Canada must use this same moment to teach the world a lesson about Canada. Our challenge is to not take the bait, but fight this on our own terms.

With the world watching, this is no longer just about our relationship with China, but a defining moment in our history. By pushing back and holding steadfast to the rule-of-law, Canada will recover from this debacle. China must come to understand, urgently, that it can’t have it both ways: using Canada as a safe-haven for its children and a safety deposit box for its money, while treating us like a vassal state.

Canada has two points of leverage to increase the cost to China of maintaining its current posture. The first results from the extraordinary level of Chinese investment in Canada. The second the result of our control of the Arctic and the Arctic trade routes.

We suggest that the time has come to expose the full extent of private Chinese investment in Canada as well as all investment by state controlled, not just state-owned entities. Let’s look behind the numbered companies and ask about the origins of that money.

Let’s ask: Why do so many Chinese citizens, including no doubt Communist Party members, have so little confidence in China that they want a Canadian passport or residency here, or to own a piece of Canadian real estate? No doubt, we’ll find some surprises in the beneficial ownership of a few Vancouver condos.

It is galling to see Meng, a proud citizen of China, serve out her house arrest in her own multimillion-dollar home while Kovrig and Spavor pace in a Chinese jail cell.

China has serious plans for the Arctic. With breathtaking hubris, it describes itself as a “near-Arctic state.” While currently only an “observer” on the Arctic Council, it is pushing for full membership — allowing it to join other nations in managing the polar north. China is actively pursuing a “Polar Silk Road” as part of its expanding transportation and trade network around the world.

This is one area where Canada has considerable leverage, from stalling any Chinese ship travelling through the Northwest Passage to pressuring members of the Arctic Council to go slow on full membership for China.

Canada should be adamant: no Arctic pretender state will have a say in the vital north or travel our northern waters until it is safe for Canadians to work and travel in China. China will have no voice in the Arctic Council until Canada says so.

This is an opportunity for Canada to show other nations how to defend against Chinese hegemony. It cannot do so by ignoring the rule-of-law. Our welcome mat may be out, but Canada is not anyone’s doormat.

 

[ccc]

看完上面那NO/YES"投票"结果，你还相信民调结果么？　

 

[ccc]

OTTAWA—Justice Minister David Lametti says foreign affairs will be a factor if and when it comes time for him to make what he acknowledges is a political decision whether to extradite Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou to the United States over China’s furious objections.

Lametti, named three weeks ago to take over the justice file after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau shuffled Jody Wilson-Raybould off to veterans’ affairs for unspecified reasons, now finds himself on the hotseat in both the Meng Wanzhou affair and the SNC-Lavalin prosecution, among other unfinished legislative business.

Justice Minister David Lametti: “It is only, if and when there is a committal order to extradite by a judge that the minister of justice will enter into the proceeding and make what is, then, a decision based on all the evidence, but recognizing that, at this point, foreign affairs is a political matter, and … make a decision.” (Patrick Doyle / Toronto Star)

On Thursday, in his first sit-down interview, Lametti admitted he had no idea why Trudeau picked him to be Wilson-Raybould’s successor, and tried to draw a distinction between his job as the government’s top lawyer and being a cabinet member, Quebec minister and MP, on all those files.

Lametti said he will often prioritize his role as attorney general or chief legal advisor to the government and its departments.

But he said as a cabinet member he has a political role to play in helping to create and direct policy.

But, he said, he will not personally make a looming decision about whether his department will put the U.S. extradition case against a Huawei executive before a Canadian judge because it would politicize the legal process, which should run its course.

 

[uglyducking]

　 加拿大法院接纳孟晚舟律师的要求，将听证保释会推迟至3月6日举行。韩媒认为，这是加拿大的缓兵之计，意在拖延时间，为决定是否同意引渡孟晚舟争取考虑时间

这个韩媒是老向的前女法官吗？

 

[ccc]

这个韩媒是老向的前女法官吗？

 

[ccc]

任正非感谢川普政府 推广了华为
www.creaders.net | 2019-02-22 07:45:25 环球网

华为创始人任正非近来加大了在外媒上的“宣传攻势”。继18日接受英国广播公司（BBC）采访时表示“美国没办法扼杀华为”后，任正非又在接受美国哥伦比亚广播公司（CBS）采访时强调，“5G不是原子弹”，他还感谢特朗普政府推广了华为。

CBS21日发布了这次专访内容。CBS说，中国科技巨头华为一直在5G技术中处于领先地位，并已与近30个国家签订了推广合同。然而，一个明显的例外是，美国认为，华为会对国家安全造成威胁。近日，任正非在华为深圳总部接受CBS记者采访时回应称，是特朗普政府多虑了。

“他们（特朗普政府）把5G技术夸大到某些军事设施的水平，但5G不是原子弹，”任正非说道，“我们现在在推出5G，很快我们还将迎来6G。在未来，将会有适合美国的新设备。”

随后，在谈到美国对5G技术及华为设备的担忧时，CBS记者表示，特朗普政府对使用华为设备的盟友发出了警告，副总统彭斯也在慕尼黑安全会议上称，“如果我们的盟友越来越依赖东方国家，我们就无法确保西方国家的安全。”

CBS记者就此询问任正非，“你将此视为一个威胁吗？”

任正非回答：“首先，我要感谢他们两个(特朗普与彭斯)，他们都是大人物。5G技术此前并不为普通人所熟知，但现在这些大人物都在谈论5G，我们变得更有影响力了，也因此收获了更多的合同。”

对于任正非的回答，记者笑称“听起来有点讽刺”，任正非说道：“请转告他们，我实际上是在感谢他们推广了我们。”

任正非接受CBS采访视频截图


在接受CBS采访前，任正非18日接受了BBC的采访。当时，他一句“美国没办法扼杀华为”迅速登上世界多家主流媒体。任正非说，世界不能离开华为，因为华为（跟竞争对手比）更先进。

21日晚，美国总统特朗普在推特上就美国发展5G技术发文称，“我要美国赢，是通过竞争，而不是封杀当前更先进的科技。” 虽然特朗普总统并没有在推文中点名华为，但外界人认为，他的话很像是在回应任正非。

华为轮值董事长胡厚崑则在领英上回应特朗普“不靠封杀”的推文，他表示，“华为已准备好，通过真正的竞争，为美国建设真正的5G网络。”