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

  • 主题发起人 主题发起人 ccc
  • 开始时间 开始时间
没注册,看不了。能不能贴一下。谢谢!

1590552687247.png

1590552726620.png

1590552773458.png

1590552806362.png

1590552838632.png

1590552881148.png

1590552948513.png

1590552987492.png

1590553046727.png

1590553097383.png
 
最后编辑:

Experienced judge Heather Holmes in the spotlight as Meng Wanzhou verdict nears

Sean FineJustice Writer
Ian Bailey
Published 2 hours ago

KGQT3AB47NDOLNOLWKR6DFIH5I.jpg

In this courtroom sketch B.C. Supreme Court Associate Chief Justice Heather Holmes, right, and Eric Gottardi, one of Huawei chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou's lawyers, are pictured at B.C. Supreme Court, in Vancouver, on Monday January 20, 2020. Nothing has placed the Associate Chief Justice of the British Columbia Supreme Court in anything like the international public spotlight she is in now.
Jane Wolsak/The Canadian Press

Nearly 40 years into her legal career as a prosecutor and a judge, Heather Holmes knows something about high-profile cases – murders, constitutional matters, odd ones like the decision on women’s right to go topless.

But nothing has placed the Associate Chief Justice of the British Columbia Supreme Court in anything like the international public spotlight she is in now.

On Wednesday, Associate Chief Justice Holmes will release a ruling in the extradition case of Chinese telecom executive Meng Wanzhou that could shape Canada-China relations for years to come.

It is an extradition case like no other in Canadian history. China detained two Canadians, Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig, in apparent reprisal for the RCMP’s arrest of Ms. Meng Dec. 1, 2018, on a request from the United States. And the legal issue is novel, too, because while Ms. Meng is charged with fraud, her lawyers say the case is really about evading U.S. sanctions against Iran – which, if true, would mean the crime she is accused of does not exist in Canada. If the judge decides the case is about sanctions, not fraud, Ms. Meng could go free.

For the moment, Associate Chief Justice Holmes is the face of Canadian justice – a system China has called a political tool of the U.S. government, and which the United States is looking toward to uphold its extradition treaty with Canada.


“I would be surprised if any judge in her position wouldn’t understand the huge consequence for Canada and for the lives of those two people in prison,” former B.C. attorney-general Brian Smith said.

"I mean, she’s human, she has to think of those things.

“But everyone I’ve talked to has the highest regard for her fairness and independence.”

Lawyer Ravi Hira says he has no doubt she will be able to look beyond the international consequences. “She cares about making sure the proper thing is done. I expect her to decide the case based on the record of the case and applying the law.”

What kind of judge is she? At times cautious – she wouldn’t allow the news media to broadcast the four-day first phase of the court proceedings in January – and at other times bold. In 2012, she ruled that retroactive parole provisions in a Harper-era criminal law were unconstitutional. In 2005, she ruled a portion of a four-year-old federal anti-gang law unconstitutional. In 2000, she ruled in favour of a woman who had violated a city bylaw by going topless at a city pool, a decision that gave women the right to do so on public property in B.C. “There was nothing degrading or dehumanizing in her conduct … anyone who was offended was not forced to look,” she said in her decision.

She can be tough. In a 2012 case, she ordered a man surrendered to the United States on major drug charges despite his argument that as a permanent resident of Canada, not a citizen, he would be deported to his former home of Sudan after his sentence. Last year, she ordered the release of $2-million in cash to a person accused in the province’s largest money laundering case because of shortcomings in the way the province’s Civil Forfeiture Office managed the file.

Before the Liberal government of Jean Chrétien appointed her to the bench in 2001, she was a federal prosecutor specializing in corporate crime. She has also worked in criminal-law policy development in Ottawa. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appointed her Associate Chief Justice in 2018.

In the B.C. court, that position carries responsibility for managing criminal cases. During the COVID-19 pandemic, she has overseen technological changes that allow the court to conduct some hearings by video conference, lawyer Richard Fowler said. She was also responsible for ensuring that the courts changed their bail processes after a Supreme Court of Canada decision last year mandated bail reviews after 90 days for those held in pre-trial detention, he said.

Another former B.C. attorney-general, Wally Oppal, said not many judges are more knowledgeable about the criminal law than Associate Chief Justice Holmes.

“You have to really know the nuances of the criminal law when you are doing commercial crime.”

Whatever she rules on Wednesday, Canadians can be content, knowing that their judges are independent, Mr. Trudeau said on Tuesday.

“One of the good things about having a truly independent justice system is that we don’t need to apologize for or explain the decisions taken by our independent justice system.”
 

Fate of two Canadians could be affected by Meng decision: former ambassador
by Amy Smart, The Canadian Press
Posted May 26, 2020 12:13 pm PDT
Last Updated May 26, 2020 at 12:20 pm PDT


JCO11364770.jpg

Meng Wanzhou, chief financial officer of Huawei, leaves B.C. Supreme Court in Vancouver on January 23, 2020. A former ambassador to China says tomorrow's decision in the extradition case of Huawei exective Meng Wanzhou could also determine the fate of two Canadians detained in China. David Mulroney, who served as Canada's ambassador to the People's Republic of China between 2009 to 2012, says if Meng is released then he expects China will eventually follow suit and release Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward

VANCOUVER — A former ambassador to China says Wednesday’s decision in the extradition case of Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou could also determine the fate of two Canadians detained in China.

David Mulroney, who served as Canada’s ambassador to the People’s Republic of China between 2009 and 2012, says if Meng is released then he expects China will eventually follow suit and release Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor.

The detention of Kovrig and Spavor has widely been seen as arbitrary retaliation against Canada for the arrest of Meng, who is wanted on fraud charges in the United States.

If Meng’s case instead proceeds to the next stage, Mulroney says he worries that China may choose to more actively prosecute the two Canadians on the national security charges they face.

While Meng’s arrest in December 2018 was a lightning rod for the collapse of Canada-China relations, Mulroney says he believes China’s behaviour over the past year has had the effect of “decoupling” the case from its initial influence on bilateral relations.

He says he believes China’s interference in Hong Kong and other events have caused Canadians to become disenchanted with the idea or goal of returning to some kind of “golden status quo” with the Asian superpower.

“I think if Ms. Meng were to go back to China, it would probably mean good news on the part of the two Michaels but I don’t think it would or should change Canada-China relations,” says Mulroney, who is also a distinguished fellow with the Munk School of Global Affairs and Public Policy at the University of Toronto.

“I think even the most ardent China boosters have been forced to reconsider things and I think have been forced to admit that there’s no going back to a golden status quo ante. It never existed and China is anything but a normal partner.”

Justice Heather Holmes of the B.C. Supreme Court is scheduled to release her ruling on the issue of so-called double criminality on Wednesday in Vancouver.

The legal arguments on double criminality centre on whether the allegations Meng is facing in the United States would be a crime in Canada.

The decision could lead to her release or it could start a new round of legal arguments, including on whether her arrest at Vancouver’s airport in December 2018 was unlawful.

The United States has charged her with fraud over allegations she violated American sanctions against Iran, which she and the Chinese telecommunications giant have denied.

Her lawyers have argued the court should dismiss the case because Canada has rejected similar sanctions, while the Crown has said the judge’s role is to determine if there’s evidence of fraud.
 
B.C. Supreme Court rejects Meng Wanzhou's application, paving the way for her extradition.
 
加拿大可以拒绝 引渡吗 ?
指责美国出于政治原因拒绝引渡
 
赶紧送走吧,在哪里对于双方都是大麻烦。即使送去美国判了刑也一定跟一般犯人待遇不一样,国人也照样会支持她,支持华为。而且无论如何也不可能关几十年。
就是麻烦多麻烦少麻烦在哪的问题。加拿大要想做人留一线就放回去,要想得罪人得罪到底就抓紧送美国。宝贝疙瘩捧自己手里早晚烫着

你这是政治解决呀
 
孟晚舟有翻盘机会吗?加拿大律师这样说
加国无忧 51.CA 2020年5月29日 09:52 来源:观察者网 作者:孙博

开篇不妨先披露一个鲜为人知的细节。

2020年5月27日的温哥华,天气晴朗。当地时间上午10:45,华为财务总监孟晚舟离开家门,在保安的严密保护下,赴法庭听取聆讯结果。上下车之际,她均面带微笑,与记者礼节性地打招呼。其实,根据事先的安排,法庭在9:00已将结果告知控辩双方,并要求律师等到10:00才能告诉孟晚舟。也就是说,孟晚舟在出庭前已知判决结果──符合“双重犯罪”标准,但她仍决定选择亲自出庭,并且一路依然保持淡定的风度,散发出勇敢、无畏的精神。

不难窥见,她的内心无比强大,早已做好打“持久战”的准备……加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省高等法院的这一裁决,意味着孟晚舟在经历544天的“软禁”后,仍无法恢复自由,电子脚铐还是不能松绑,仍要过“取保候审”的生活。最终她是否被引渡到美国,将会触发新一轮的法律程序,上诉时间可能旷日持久。那么,孟晚舟案的下一步怎么走?还有翻盘的机会吗?判决将如何影响中加关系?……在这关键时刻,笔者采访了几位加拿大的著名华人律师。

一、裁决书“一面倒”,再起诉边境局违反人权宪章有机会获胜吗?

针对不列颠哥伦比亚省高等法院副首席大法官霍姆斯(Heather Holmes)的裁决,加拿大资深大律师陈丙丁感到很失望。

5_1052125138_1.jpg

加拿大资深大律师陈丙丁 他指出,霍姆斯的裁决是“一面倒”的,接纳了加拿大联邦检察官代表美国政府提出的论点,全盘驳回孟晚舟律师团队提出的论点,其结果是对孟晚舟的引渡程序将继续进行。陈丙丁律师表示,尽管法官裁决书是按加拿大一般法官判决书的规格书写的,引用相关判例也甚为广泛,但她的裁决结果可能受她在出任法官之前,长期在省和联邦法庭部门工作的影响。

法官认为,对于欺诈这项犯罪,要从实质发生的行为来定,要从广义角度看,才不至于限制加拿大履行其“国际义务”,这里是指引渡条约里的“义务”,结果就否认了孟晚舟的申请。加拿大著名刑事辩护律师沈晨介绍说,加拿大的引渡程序有三个关键的步骤,第一是引渡的申请国发出请求,请求被接纳了以后,对当事人进行逮捕。孟晚舟案的这个阶段,已在2018年12月份已经完成了。

5_1052125138_2.jpg

加拿大著名刑事辩护律师沈晨 孟晚舟案目前处于第二阶段──引渡聆讯。当时,孟晚舟的辩护律师提出了两个争议点:一个是“双重犯罪”原则;另外一个是在孟晚舟入境时,被加拿大边境局的工作人员、皇家骑警进行了长时间询问,询问的过程当中还没收了她的手机,这个过程有没有违反加拿大的人权宪章对个人的保护。以上第一个问题,法庭已在5月27日给出了答案,就是裁定该案符合“双重犯罪”原则。

接下来,法庭要回答另外一个问题,就是孟晚舟在入境时,加拿大有没有违反加拿大的宪法保护,如果有的话,那么法庭还要回答下面一个问题,就是他们的行为是否足够严重到对孟晚舟终止引渡聆讯、引渡程序,6月份的聆讯就要回答这两个问题。加拿大边境局或皇家骑警在逮捕孟晚舟的过程中,可能存在违反《加拿大人权和自由宪章》(简称《宪章》)第9条──保护个人不受执法部门的任意拘捕。如果执法部门违反了第9条,通常也会违反《宪章》下的第10条。

该条要求执法人员在当事人被拘捕时要立即告知其被逮捕或拘留的原因,以及她有请律师及和律师通话的权利。沈晨律师指出,目前披露出来的关于孟晚舟是如何被拘留和逮捕的证据很少。因此,很难评估孟晚舟的宪章权利是否受到侵犯。更复杂的是,按照加拿大最高法院先前的判例,《宪章》的保护在出入境关口通常不适用。例如,一个人可能被一名执法人员在边界长时间拦截盘问而不会被认为她被拘禁或逮捕,从而不会触动《宪章》第9和第10条的保护。

因此,对孟晚舟的律师来说,弄清孟晚舟在加拿大边境过境时到底发生了什么是至关重要的。即使引渡法官裁定孟晚舟的《宪章》权力受到侵犯,引渡法官还需考虑另外一个问题:执法部门的违宪行为是否足以严重到让引渡程序终止。等以上两个问题回答完之后,整个第二阶段就结束了,就进入到第三阶段。

第三阶段就是由加拿大的司法部长来决定,要不要把孟晚舟引渡到美国,当然司法部部长的权力是非常有限的,这在引渡法下给出了明确的要求和定义。加拿大引渡法权威加里·波特丁(Gary Botting)律师在接受媒体采访时指出,司法部长确实有权随时制止这些诉讼程序,但加拿大总理杜鲁多已反复提出“法治”,以将程序与政治意愿的影响区分开。

但波特丁强调,在引渡中政治权宜必须在法治上占上风。根据波特丁的经验,此案在法院还有很长的路要走,估计甚至可能拖延10年之久。资深大律师陈丙丁同样认为,这将是个可能延续数年的官司。而且,现在看来第二场耹讯的结果也很可能不乐观,引渡程序或许最终还是会进入实质耹讯的阶段。
二、 什么时候上诉?

不少法律界人士表示,现在还不是孟晚舟提出上诉的时候。因为法官目前的裁决实际上并未将孟晚舟判处引渡,而只是以“双重犯罪”为由决定引渡程序应继续进行。如果法院最终裁定应将孟晚舟判引渡,这才是她上诉的时候。沈晨律师认为,接下来孟晚舟的律师很有可能会找出各种理由来上诉,上诉的话也是为了争取一些时间。

很多人会有一个错觉,如果对这个裁决不满意,就可以上诉,但在加拿大不是这样的,你必须要指出法官在裁决过程当中的错误,这个错误要足够严重,才可以上诉。而且在上诉时,即便是上诉院接受了此上诉,但也有法律上的要求,就是他们要尊重底下庭审的法官的判决,除非庭审的法官在判决过程当中有明显的差错,他们才会驳回。

沈晨律师表示,按照聆讯的流程,双方提交证据,陈词结束后,无非就是等法官的裁决。在这个阶段,律师基本上已经没什么可以做的了,就是等裁决。当然裁决下来之后,律师可以考虑是否要上诉,那么,到6月份为止的话,应该是没有太多可以做的。有可能时间上会拖得比较久。他感觉其实这个聆讯的过程已经结束了很长一段时间,就是说法官用了很长时间来写出他的决定。

一般法官用这么长时间来做出一个决定的话,说明他要在法律上、法条上,做非常周全的各方面的考虑。如果孟晚舟在第二轮依然被法官判输的话,第三阶段就是由司法部部长来决定。一旦高等法院法官决定引渡令上的人可以被引渡,他还有30天的时间以书面形式向司法部长提出上诉。陈丙丁律师表示,霍姆斯法官的裁决简直把这种引渡的最终拍板推给了联邦司法部长,孟女士的辩护律师提出,为了制裁伊朗而把孟女士引渡到美国是不符合加拿大的价值观的,因为加拿大已经撤销了对伊朗的制裁。

但法官说,到时候司法部长根据加拿大本国引渡法,可以考虑各方面的因素,如果认为引渡到美国对孟女士是不公平的,有压迫性的,部长可以拒绝引渡要求。霍姆斯法官在她的裁决书内直接挑明了这点。那么,在什么情况下司法部长可以拒绝引渡令呢?沈晨律师指出,在高等法院法官做出引渡判决后,加拿大司法部长可以决定向引渡申请国移交该名引渡令上的人,也可以决定不移交该人。

司法部长在考虑下列若干因素后,可以行使酌情权, 不移交该名面临引渡的人:考虑到所有相关情况,引渡该人将是不公正或压迫性的;提出引渡请求的目的是以种族、宗教、国籍、族裔、语言、肤色、政治见解、性别、性取向、年龄、精神或身体残疾或地位为由起诉或惩罚该人,或该人的利益可能因上述任何原因而受到损害;根据引渡伙伴国的法律, 提出引渡请求的刑事指控可判处死刑;被要求引渡的刑事指控是政治犯罪或政治性质的罪行;该人在他缺席的情况下被定罪,并且在引渡后该人无法对案件进行复审;犯罪时,该人不满 18岁;加拿大已经就引渡请求上所列出的刑事指控对该人在加拿大本土进行了刑事指控;引渡请求上所列的刑事指控均不发生在引渡请求国所拥有管辖权的领土内。

如果司法部长决定不发出移交令,孟晚舟应当可以被释放,重返自由。反之,孟晚舟也可以在第三阶段结束后对司法部部长的决议提出上诉。然而,加拿大拒绝引渡申请的案例,还是比较少的,而且过去的立法倾向也是推动引渡。加拿大最早涉及引渡的法律可以追溯到1877年。在1999年,加拿大最新的《引渡法》正式生效。改法案的意义是简化引渡程序,加快引渡的速度,从而使加拿大可以更快地将被通缉的逃犯归还给和加拿大签订引渡条约或协议的合作伙伴国,比如美国,以便引渡条约伙伴国可以对被引渡人提起刑事诉讼、判刑或执行判决。

加拿大政府还可向国际刑事法院引渡某人,从而使其受到战争罪的起诉。据《渥太华公民报》的报道,自从1999年新的引渡法生效后,加拿大平均每年引渡100人左右。然而,截至2014年,加拿大收到大约1500份引渡申请,其中只有五个申请被拒绝。

三、判决打破了加中关系本来有望改善的机会

孟晚舟的案件牵动着海内外华人的心,不少关注加中关系的人士希望孟晚舟能够获释,他们对于法官的这次裁决感到失望。其实,孟晚舟的案件是中加关系的一个结。中加两国对于孟晚舟一案的观点有本质上的区别,中方认为是政治事件,是美国打压中国,加拿大则成了帮凶。但加方坚持说“司法独立”,政府不干预司法,加美两国之间长年有各类引渡案件。不少人担心,判决的最后代价将由谁来付?与大多数引渡案件不同的是,付出代价的不仅仅是被告,加拿大也将在这里付出代价。

预期这一裁决结果,可能对加中两国的双边贸易产生负面的影响。不管怎样,霍姆斯法官的裁决把孟晚舟的引渡案推向“遥遥无期”,在这段时间里,在很多中国老百姓眼中,加拿大变成配合美国制裁华为的帮手。陈丙丁身为律师,认为即使法官本人真是依据加拿大法律“独立裁决”的,但在中美正在升级的对抗中,很难改变这种观感。陈丙丁最后强调,加中关系本来有望改善的机会,就让霍姆斯法官的裁决给打破了。综上所述,孟晚舟争取自由之路并不平坦,甚至荆棘丛生,不禁使人想起华为的经典广告“芭蕾之脚”……

5_1052125138_5.jpg
图片来源:华为 来源观察者网
 
后退
顶部