New memo should free Meng
▶ Arguments show Canada, HSBC US ‘accomplices’
New arguments raised by lawyers for Huawei Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou in Canada further indicate that London-based lender HSBC was an accomplice of the US in Meng’s case.
These arguments, if proven, mean that HSBC could face legal consequences and a backlash from businesses and the public in China, for its role in the US’ relentless crackdown on Huawei, experts said.
The arguments, which claim that US authorities made reckless misstatements and omissions about a key presentation the Huawei senior executive delivered to HSBC, has also further proved that Meng’s probe is a purely political maneuver rather than a legal case, said legal experts. They noted that if the “decisive” argument could be proved, Meng should be set free immediately.
On Tuesday (Beijing time), in a bid to fight extradition to the US, lawyers for Meng raised a new argument in a memo filed to the Supreme Court of British Columbia, saying that Meng had been falsely accused and claiming the US misrepresented and ignored details of a crucial presentation Meng gave to HSBC.
The presentation – which was later handed over to the US Department of Justice (DOJ) by HSBC, and which the DOJ alleges contained “numerous misrepresentations” – played a key role in the US charges against Meng.
The memo also indicated that HSBC may have known about Huawei’s relationship with Skycom long before – meaning the so-called bank fraud charge can’t be established, said Yue Dongxiao, a US-based lawyer who is closely observing the case.
“Meng could be set free if the document could be admitted into evidence,” Yue said.
Meng was arrested in December 2018 by Canadian police at the request of the US during a flight stopover in Canada. Last month, a ruling by a Canadian court left Meng under detention in Canada.
Describing Canada’s latest ruling as completely surrendering its selfproclaimed judicial and diplomatic independence to US bullying, legal experts found that previous legal documents indicate that HSBC set a trap for Meng as the bank had its own issues (a money-laundering scandal in Mexico) in the face of US sanctions.
In such a case, the bank could be considered as an “agent” of the US government that did the dirty work to guarantee its “safety,” a source close to the matter said.
“The fact that HSBC would actually benefit from selling out Meng would also be dispositive of the fraud claim, for there would be no damages resulting from HSBC’s purported reliance on Meng’s statements,” Yue said.
Industry insiders noted that if the multinational bank, which generates almost 80 percent of its profits from China, was proven to have “betrayed” Huawei, it should be prepared for “harsh punishment” in China, such as being put on the country’s “unreliable entity list.”
“While relying on the China market for business, HSBC is disregarding the interests of Chinese customers, distorting information from Huawei and the words of Huawei executives to the US government. If Huawei sues HSBC in China, it is perfectly reasonable,” said an industry insider surnamed Li.