4 ms·

> The Canadian government wishes they had never gotten involved - they should have just let her slip. With the US and China, Canada is between a rock and a hard

by gpm 7y ago

> The Canadian government wishes they had never gotten involved - they should have just let her slip. With the US and China, Canada is between a rock and a hard place. Source on this? I certainly haven't heard the government say anything to this effect. As a Canadian I certainly do not wish we had "just let her slip". We're a country of laws. We should follow those laws, not just give in to pressure from China because they're big, mean, and scary.

logicchains 7y ago
A country of Canadian laws, not American laws.
- gpm 7y ago
  Indeed, and Canadian laws say that we should arrest her and probably extradite her to the US subject to the outcome of some hearings.
  - sunstone 7y ago
    The standard for extradition is that the alleged infraction must also be a crime in the country being asked to extradite. So that's what Canada is trying to determine right now.
DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
> Source on this? I certainly haven't heard the government say anything to this effect. I'm basing this on the government's paralysis in this case. > We're a country of laws. Canada's system of laws is being abused by the Trump administration, which has made no secret of its desire to use Meng Wanzhou as a bargaining chip in the trade war. Allowing the Canadian extradition treaty with the US to be abused for political ends was not wise. There were smarter ways to deal with the request. Hong Kong's reaction to the US extradition request for Snowden (please resubmit the paperwork while we let him fly out of our jurisdiction) would have been a good model to follow. > We should follow those laws, not just give in to pressure from China because they're big, mean, and scary. The possible US reaction to not extraditing Meng Wanzhou would be just as - if not more - scary. Canada is extremely dependent on trade with the US. That's why the government arrested Meng Wanzhou, and why it is finding it so difficult to acknowledge the obvious: that this is a politically motivated prosecution that does not fall under the terms of the extradition treaty.
- gpm 7y ago
  > I'm basing this on the government's paralysis in this case. What paralysis? It's moving through the court system at the court systems typical pace. (Which is slower than I would like... but that's just a general comment about our court system) > Canada's system of laws is being abused by the Trump administration This is primarily an argument for amending our laws in response to this case, not ignoring them in this case. Admittedly it's partially an argument that might be raised to say that the laws do not support extradition in this case, but of course at the time we detained Meng Wanzhou this was nowhere near as clear, and her lawyers are more then capable of making this argument to the court. > The possible US reaction to not extraditing Meng Wanzhou would be just as - if not more - scary. Indeed, and we should pay as little attention to that as we do to China's threats and retaliatory arrests. I have complete faith that our courts are paying as little attention to it.
  - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
    You can be certain that there is heavy government involvement in the case, just as there was in the SNC Lavalin case. The government is not simply going to leave an important matter of state like this to the vagaries of the courts. > This is primarily an argument for amending our laws in response to this case, not ignoring them in this case. The political exception to extradition quite obviously applies here. This is a standard clause in extradition treaties. The thing is, the Canadian government is afraid to use this clause for political reasons - fear of retaliation from the Trump administration.
  - free_rms 7y ago
    So you're saying we should all ignore the very, very obvious political angles here and trust that it's all about the rule of law, applied neutrally and apolitically? Next you'll be telling us that a police officer would never lie on the stand.
    - gpm 7y ago
      No, I'm telling you that you should look at the public court process and conclude that it's the rule of law being applied, very little trust is necessary in this instance. Not requiring trust is the entire reason why we have such a public court process.
billfruit 7y ago
I doub't her detainment had anything at all to do about Canada, so in this case Canada was, it appeared merely toeing the US line, rather than having a specific stake in the matter. Really though the crux of the matter is wether Meng is held due to a real criminality as per Canadian/US law, or is being held as a political move, and signals from both US and Canadian administration has been confusing in this regard. Some statements from US and administrations give a feeling that she's being held for political reasons. "Several well-known Canadians, including former prime minister Jean Chrétien and former foreign minister John Manley, have suggested that Canada let Meng go or orchestrate a “prisoner exchange” with China." From WaPo on this issue: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/extradition-hearing-of-meng-wanzhou-huawei-executive-at-the-center-of-us-canada-china-rift-opens-in-vancouver/2020/01/17/97fc78a6-37d3-11ea-a1ff-c48c1d59a4a1_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/extraditio...
- generatorguy 7y ago
  Canada does have a stake in the matter as Huawei hacked Nortel to steal their IP and then undercut all their business deals causing nortel to go bankrupt to the detriment of 94,000 employees and every single Canadian that owned just about and stock market fund. It is embarrassing that we haven’t banned Huawei products in Canada yet.
  - billfruit 7y ago
    Yes but that is not related to the case at hand. So if that is used a justification to hold Meng, that is a political reason. Governments in democracies, esp the judicial system is supposed to act to uphold fairness and not national self-interest.
    - generatorguy 6y ago
      very good point. The Canadian government should grow a pair and determine if nortel's IP was stolen and then act accordingly.
  - DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
jussij 7y ago
> As a Canadian I certainly do not wish we had "just let her slip". History has shown us and it keeps showing us principles are great as long as they don't get in the way of business. For example why was it that Trudeau decided to "just let [it] slip" when it came to the SNC-Lavalin corruption investigation? https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/06/americas/canada-politics-explainer/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/06/americas/canada-politics-...
- gpm 7y ago
  Trudeau was, rightly (to the extent that he was involved/aware), lambasted for that decision...
  - jussij 7y ago
    However, at least for me, that then taints the credibility of Trudeau and the government he leads. I have idea if the claims against Huawei are true (many of these details seem to be kept secret) and my suspicion would be they may well have been involved in some sort of industrial espionage. I'm also sure many companies and countries around the world are also actively engaged in all sorts of espionage. However, the fact a government has been shown to easily bend it's own laws for the sake of business also means Huawei's claim this is a politically motivated attack can't be so easily dismissed.

by gpm 7y ago

logicchains 7y ago

A country of Canadian laws, not American laws.

gpm 7y ago
Indeed, and Canadian laws say that we should arrest her and probably extradite her to the US subject to the outcome of some hearings.
- sunstone 7y ago
  The standard for extradition is that the alleged infraction must also be a crime in the country being asked to extradite. So that's what Canada is trying to determine right now.

DiogenesKynikos 7y ago

> Source on this? I certainly haven't heard the government say anything to this effect. I'm basing this on the government's paralysis in this case. > We're a country of laws. Canada's system of laws is being abused by the Trump administration, which has made no secret of its desire to use Meng Wanzhou as a bargaining chip in the trade war. Allowing the Canadian extradition treaty with the US to be abused for political ends was not wise. There were smarter ways to deal with the request. Hong Kong's reaction to the US extradition request for Snowden (please resubmit the paperwork while we let him fly out of our jurisdiction) would have been a good model to follow. > We should follow those laws, not just give in to pressure from China because they're big, mean, and scary. The possible US reaction to not extraditing Meng Wanzhou would be just as - if not more - scary. Canada is extremely dependent on trade with the US. That's why the government arrested Meng Wanzhou, and why it is finding it so difficult to acknowledge the obvious: that this is a politically motivated prosecution that does not fall under the terms of the extradition treaty.

gpm 7y ago
> I'm basing this on the government's paralysis in this case. What paralysis? It's moving through the court system at the court systems typical pace. (Which is slower than I would like... but that's just a general comment about our court system) > Canada's system of laws is being abused by the Trump administration This is primarily an argument for amending our laws in response to this case, not ignoring them in this case. Admittedly it's partially an argument that might be raised to say that the laws do not support extradition in this case, but of course at the time we detained Meng Wanzhou this was nowhere near as clear, and her lawyers are more then capable of making this argument to the court. > The possible US reaction to not extraditing Meng Wanzhou would be just as - if not more - scary. Indeed, and we should pay as little attention to that as we do to China's threats and retaliatory arrests. I have complete faith that our courts are paying as little attention to it.
- DiogenesKynikos 7y ago
  You can be certain that there is heavy government involvement in the case, just as there was in the SNC Lavalin case. The government is not simply going to leave an important matter of state like this to the vagaries of the courts. > This is primarily an argument for amending our laws in response to this case, not ignoring them in this case. The political exception to extradition quite obviously applies here. This is a standard clause in extradition treaties. The thing is, the Canadian government is afraid to use this clause for political reasons - fear of retaliation from the Trump administration.
- free_rms 7y ago
  So you're saying we should all ignore the very, very obvious political angles here and trust that it's all about the rule of law, applied neutrally and apolitically? Next you'll be telling us that a police officer would never lie on the stand.
  - gpm 7y ago
    No, I'm telling you that you should look at the public court process and conclude that it's the rule of law being applied, very little trust is necessary in this instance. Not requiring trust is the entire reason why we have such a public court process.

billfruit 7y ago

I doub't her detainment had anything at all to do about Canada, so in this case Canada was, it appeared merely toeing the US line, rather than having a specific stake in the matter. Really though the crux of the matter is wether Meng is held due to a real criminality as per Canadian/US law, or is being held as a political move, and signals from both US and Canadian administration has been confusing in this regard. Some statements from US and administrations give a feeling that she's being held for political reasons. "Several well-known Canadians, including former prime minister Jean Chrétien and former foreign minister John Manley, have suggested that Canada let Meng go or orchestrate a “prisoner exchange” with China." From WaPo on this issue: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/extradition-hearing-of-meng-wanzhou-huawei-executive-at-the-center-of-us-canada-china-rift-opens-in-vancouver/2020/01/17/97fc78a6-37d3-11ea-a1ff-c48c1d59a4a1_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/extraditio...

generatorguy 7y ago
Canada does have a stake in the matter as Huawei hacked Nortel to steal their IP and then undercut all their business deals causing nortel to go bankrupt to the detriment of 94,000 employees and every single Canadian that owned just about and stock market fund. It is embarrassing that we haven’t banned Huawei products in Canada yet.
- billfruit 7y ago
  Yes but that is not related to the case at hand. So if that is used a justification to hold Meng, that is a political reason. Governments in democracies, esp the judicial system is supposed to act to uphold fairness and not national self-interest.
  - generatorguy 6y ago
    very good point. The Canadian government should grow a pair and determine if nortel's IP was stolen and then act accordingly.
- DiogenesKynikos 7y ago

jussij 7y ago

> As a Canadian I certainly do not wish we had "just let her slip". History has shown us and it keeps showing us principles are great as long as they don't get in the way of business. For example why was it that Trudeau decided to "just let [it] slip" when it came to the SNC-Lavalin corruption investigation? https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/06/americas/canada-politics-explainer/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2019/03/06/americas/canada-politics-...

gpm 7y ago
Trudeau was, rightly (to the extent that he was involved/aware), lambasted for that decision...
- jussij 7y ago
  However, at least for me, that then taints the credibility of Trudeau and the government he leads. I have idea if the claims against Huawei are true (many of these details seem to be kept secret) and my suspicion would be they may well have been involved in some sort of industrial espionage. I'm also sure many companies and countries around the world are also actively engaged in all sorts of espionage. However, the fact a government has been shown to easily bend it's own laws for the sake of business also means Huawei's claim this is a politically motivated attack can't be so easily dismissed.