|
|
本帖最后由 老福 于 2021-8-13 08:12 编辑
很奇怪，根据最近的报道 (https://www.theglobeandmail.com/ ... ions-us-allegation/)，孟晚舟案的法官在庭审提问时竟然说U.S. allegation is unclear。在整个法律程序的这个阶段提出这样的问题，非常令人吃惊。这是孟晚舟案反转的信号吗？
最核心的部分是黑体部分，基本上法官这样问的：既然美方指控孟晚舟“falsely misrepresented that Huawei didn’t control Skycom”(而且汇丰银行事先不知道华为和Skycom的真实关系)，那么汇丰银行怎么可能仅仅因为孟晚舟说Skycom一切合规没有触犯禁运令就相信Skycom没问题呢？这是一个悖论，二者不可能同时成立。黑体的后半部分是前面一段的后续，法官表示怀疑孟晚舟的presentation会导致汇丰银行触犯法律。
上述论述听起来更像孟晚舟的律师在替她辩护，而且也是法官拒绝接受的新证据要说明的部分。
下面是具体的报道，包括法官的原话。
A B.C. Supreme Court judge who must decide whether Meng Wanzhou can be extradited to New York to face a fraud charge says she doesn’t understand the U.S. allegation against the Chinese executive.
。。。
Before Robert Frater, lawyer for the Attorney-General, could begin to lay out the evidence, Associate Chief Justice Heather Holmes of the B.C. Supreme Court questioned whether the U.S. had explained the essence of the crime it alleged Ms. Meng had committed – and in particular, its connection to sanctions against Iran.
“I’ve had great difficulty understanding,” she said. The judge – a former prosecutor specializing in corporate crime – went on to pose questions about how the United States set out the allegations in the record of the case (ROC) it supplied to Canadian authorities.
。。。
Ms. Meng is charged with fraud for allegedly misrepresenting to HSBC, in a PowerPoint presentation in Hong Kong in 2013, Huawei’s links to Skycom Tech Co. Ltd., another technology company. The U.S. alleges her misrepresentations exposed HSBC to the risk that it would be punished, criminally or civilly, for violating U.S. sanctions on Iran in dealings with Skycom and Huawei.
。。。
“What I don’t understand,” she told Mr. Frater, “is whether the simple fact of dealing with government in Iran would be viewed as offside sanctions.”
“No,” Mr. Frater replied. “It is clear there is good Iran business and bad Iran business.”
“Can you show me that in the ROCs?” (The ROCs are the documents that lay out the evidence and explain the alleged crime.)
Mr. Frater acknowledged: “There isn’t a clear statement of ‘here’s what’s on one side of the line’ and ‘here’s what’s on the other.’”
He said there was a “reasonable inference” that some Iranian business was legal, from the fact that Ms. Meng was candid about doing business in Iran.
“She admits that they’re doing business in Iran. She admits they work … with Skycom. No point in making that admission if all activity in Iran was proscribed,” Mr. Frater said.
“I have been troubled by this issue,” the judge said. “What I’m trying to get at is how does the ROC make all of that clear? That certain things engage sanctions and other things don’t. Because it’s only with that background that one can assess what’s said in the PowerPoint as to whether it was deceptive.”
Mr. Frater said he would get back to her on the point after the lunch break. When they reconvened, he said Huawei was certainly doing permissible business in Iran – but transactions in U.S. dollars put through in the United States were prohibited.
The judge also asked about possible contradictions in Mr. Frater’s summarizing of the case against Ms. Meng: that she told HSBC there was no risk of sanctions violations from Huawei or Skycom, while failing to disclose the true relationship between the two companies.
Associate Chief Justice Holmes said: “As I understand your theory ... the bank had nothing to worry about as far as sanctions violations went because Ms. Meng or Huawei could assure the bank that Skycom was in compliance. Doesn’t that run counter to the theory ... that she falsely misrepresented that Huawei didn’t control Skycom? In other words, how would she be able to give that assurance ... in a way that would be satisfactory and convincing to the bank unless Huawei was in full control of Skycom?”
Mr. Frater said he didn’t see the inconsistency.
The judge then asked whether it was reasonable to suppose that a large bank with risk committees would rely on one individual’s assurance about companies not under its control.
The meeting between Ms. Meng and HSBC was arranged after Reuters published articles suggesting Skycom, which it said had “close ties” with Huawei, was violating sanctions. Associate Chief Justice Holmes expressed skepticism several times that the bank was truly put at risk by Ms. Meng’s presentation after it received a clear warning of sanctions violations in the Reuters reports. For fraud to have occurred, HSBC would have had to face a risk from the misrepresentations.
|
评分
-
查看全部评分
|
雷达卡
楼主
收藏
分享
淘帖
支持
反对
提升卡
置顶卡
沉默卡
喧嚣卡
变色卡
抢沙发
千斤顶
显身卡
发表于 2021-9-27 13:33:54
