Jump to content
Technical Difficulties Read more... ×
BANGKOK 14 December 2018 02:45
rooster59

U.S. seeks extradition of Huawei CFO over Iran links, court hears

Recommended Posts

U.S. seeks extradition of Huawei CFO over Iran links, court hears

By Julie Gordon and Steve Stecklow

 

800x800 (4).jpg

Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou, who was arrested on an extradition warrant, appears at her B.C. Supreme Court bail hearing in a drawing in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada December 7, 2018. REUTERS/Jane Wolsak

 

VANCOUVER/LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. prosecutors want to extradite a top executive of China's Huawei Technologies Co Ltd [HWT.UL] to face accusations she covered up links to a company that sold equipment to Iran despite U.S. sanctions, a Vancouver court heard on Friday.

 

Huawei Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou, 46, is the daughter of the founder of Huawei, which is the world's largest supplier of telecommunications network equipment and which U.S. intelligence agencies allege is linked to China's government.

 

She was arrested in Canada on Dec. 1 at the request of the United States, a move that has roiled global stock markets on fears it could escalate a trade war between the United States and China.

 

The court heard that the U.S. investigation stemmed from a 2013 Reuters report https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-huawei-skycom/exclusive-huawei-cfo-linked-to-firm-that-offered-hp-gear-to-iran-idUKBRE90U0CA20130131 that Huawei used Hong Kong-base Skycom Tech Co Ltd to carry out business in Iran despite U.S. and European Union bans.

 

Huawei has previously denied it violated any such sanctions. A spokesman for Huawei was not immediately available on Friday to comment on the allegations against Meng.

 

Friday's court hearing is intended to decide on whether Meng can post bail or if she is a flight risk and should be kept in detention.

 

The United States has 60 days to make a formal extradition request, which a Canadian judge will weigh to determine whether there is a strong case against Meng. Then it is up to Canada's justice minister to decide whether to extradite her.

 

If extradited to the United States, Meng would face charges of conspiracy to defraud multiple financial institutions, the court heard, with a maximum sentence of 30 years for each charge.

 

The prosecutor opposed Meng's release on bail, arguing she is a high flight risk, has few ties to Vancouver and that her family's wealth would mean than even a multi-million-dollar surety would not weigh heavily should she breach conditions.

 

Meng's lawyer, David Martin, said her prominence makes her unlikely to breach any court orders.

 

"You can trust her," he said. Fleeing "would humiliate and embarrass her father, whom she loves," he argued.

 

IRAN BUSINESS

 

The U.S. case against Meng involves a Hong Kong-based company called Skycom Tech Co Ltd. that had an office in Tehran. Huawei has previously described Skycom as one of its "major local partners" in Iran.

 

In January 2013, Reuters reported the company was closely tied to Huawei and Meng and had tried to sell embargoed Hewlett-Packard computer equipment to Iran's largest mobile-phone operator.

 

In 2007, a management company controlled by Huawei's parent company held all of Skycom's shares. At the time, Meng served as the management firm's company secretary. Meng also served on Skycom's board between February 2008 and April 2009, according to Skycom records filed with Hong Kong's Companies Registry.

 

Huawei used Skycom's Tehran office to provide mobile network equipment to several major telecommunications companies in Iran, people familiar with the company's operations have said. Two of the sources said that technically Skycom was controlled by Iranians to comply with local law but that it effectively was run by Huawei.

 

Huawei and Skycom were "the same," a former Huawei employee who worked in Iran said on Friday.

 

The United States has been looking since at least 2016 into whether Huawei violated U.S. sanctions against Iran, Reuters reported in April. Huawei has denied it violated any such sanctions.

 

U.S. intelligence agencies also allege that Huawei is linked to China's government and that its equipment could contain "backdoors" for use by government spies. No evidence has been produced publicly and the firm has repeatedly denied the claims.

 

Chinese Foreign ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said on Friday that neither Canada nor the United States had provided China any evidence that Meng had broken any law in those two countries, and reiterated Beijing's demand that she be released.

 

Chinese state media have slammed Meng's detention, accusing the United States of trying to "stifle" Huawei and curb its global expansion.

 

Huawei said on Wednesday that "the company has been provided very little information regarding the charges and is not aware of any wrongdoing by Ms. Meng."

 

 
reuters_logo.jpg
-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-12-08

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, IAMHERE said:

Huawei  helping Iran develop a nuclear bomb is not right.

Is that another of the charges? Or are you saying this is political?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Is that another of the charges? Or are you saying this is political?

The US sanctions against Iran are to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. If other countries evade the US sanctions then they are assisting Iran. Right or wrong that is the logic I see. Doesn't matter that much to me, I'd like Iran to get the bomb if it's the last thing they do. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, IAMHERE said:

The US sanctions against Iran are to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. If other countries evade the US sanctions then they are assisting Iran. Right or wrong that is the logic I see. Doesn't matter that much to me, I'd like Iran to get the bomb if it's the last thing they do. 

Totally not correct.

 

But hey, that is not important at all anymore.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

 


Huawei received technology from the US and signed a contract not to transfer  such technology to countries that are not authorised to received, then Huawei broke the agreement and transferred the technology to a country under sanctions .
 

 

 

Well, the US must be as dumb as a box of rocks if they believe any promise that a Chinese company or government authority gives to them.

 

I mean, come on, when was the US born??? 🙂

Edited by simon43
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, sirineou said:

 That is correct but,

   a chinese company that receives technology under agreement not to transfer such technology to countries under sanctions has to obey such agreement.

 Huawei received technology from the US and signed a contract not to transfer  such technology to countries that are not authorised to received, then Huawei broke the agreement and transferred the technology to a country under sanctions .

Huawei is in breach of contract, and faces charges related to that action.

Finaly, I understand. Thanks, I had struggled on whether this was a UN sanction vs. a USA sanction and why China/Huawei legally had to comply. Now I understand. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, simon43 said:

 

Well, the US must be as dumb as a box of rocks if they believe any promise that a Chinese company or government authority gives to them.

 

I mean, come on, when was the US born??? 🙂

Being born and becoming cognizant are different times; cognizant was when Trump got elected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ulic said:

Finaly, I understand. Thanks, I had struggled on whether this was a UN sanction vs. a USA sanction and why China/Huawei legally had to comply. Now I understand. 

Thank you for that!

  I often don't understand why posters can not say "fair enough" , "I did not understood", or "I was wrong". and enter into considerable mental gymnastics trying to defend the indefensible. 

  Is it like we never misunderstood, or were wrong, or we will not misunderstand or be wrong again?

Your ability to admit  that you didn't understand says a lot about you, all good!:clap2:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sponsors
×