Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Canada Crime Businesses United States Politics Technology

Canada Arrests Top Huawei Executive For Allegedly Violating Iran Sanctions (theglobeandmail.com) 163

Canada has arrested Huawei's chief financial officer on suspicion of violating U.S. trade sanctions against Iran. "Wanzhou Meng, who is also the deputy chair of Huawei's board and the daughter of company founder Ren Zhengfei, was arrested in Vancouver at the request of U.S. authorities," reports The Globe and Mail. From the report: "Wanzhou Meng was arrested in Vancouver on December 1. She is sought for extradition by the United States, and a bail hearing has been set for Friday," Justice department spokesperson Ian McLeod said in a statement to The Globe and Mail. "As there is a publication ban in effect, we cannot provide any further detail at this time. The ban was sought by Ms. Meng.

A Canadian source with knowledge of the arrest said U.S. law enforcement authorities are alleging that Ms. Meng tried to evade the U.S. trade embargo against Iran but provided no further details. Since at least 2016, U.S. authorities have been reviewing Huawei's alleged shipping of U.S.-origin products to Iran and other countries in violation of U.S. export and sanctions laws.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Canada Arrests Top Huawei Executive For Allegedly Violating Iran Sanctions

Comments Filter:
  • by hackingbear ( 988354 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2018 @09:36PM (#57756522)

    Holding as a hostage for negotiation. I thought only terrorists think of this trick and a not a country that say "In God We Trust"?

    • The US is a great country, with a diversity to envy and genuine potential to keep leading democracy, if they get ahold of its reins like they do every other decade. But one canot forget that both US, Russia and China, the 3 world potencies, have all taken ahold of land, or even entire countries as hostage for negotiations. It is, after all, the country that seeks to arrest its own whistleblowers. Leadership has been a real problem in the world lately, but America does get the prize of being the most flamboy

      • by Anonymous Coward

        "US, Russia and China, the 3 world potencies"
        Russia does not belong on this list. The state of California has a higher GDP then Russia. To be a real world power requires both military and economic dominance. Compared to the US Russia is basically a third world country with a nuclear arsenal. And their nuclear arsenal can never be used due to MAD. Russia's conventional forces are a mere shadow of what they had been during the cold war.

      • .both US, Russia and China, the 3 world potencies,....

        The term 'both' implies only 2 subjects: once you mention those, having more makes it a howler

        • yeah I should have probably used "all", "all of" or some other expression. I likely was going to mention 2 but ended up adding a third country, but even if not, to a non-native english speaker like me, the train of thought is lost even when reviewing my own text.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Comment removed based on user account deletion
      • Rio Tinto (Score:4, Interesting)

        by emil ( 695 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2018 @10:24PM (#57756760)

        Yes, this is the Wikipedia entry [wikipedia.org] for the Rio Tinto prosecution.

        Several mining companies reported [news.com.au] that their computer systems were compromised around that time.

      • They can't send anybody to gitmo if they enter the US first, and Canada isn't going to extradite somebody "to the US" and then send them somewhere else. The whole legal argument for the Court not shutting down gitmo is that it is rented from Cuba, so it isn't our laws. That argument doesn't work once a detainee is physically present in the US.

        If they wanted her in gitmo, the plane would need to have landed somewhere without too many treaties, or in a war zone. Or she would have needed to disappear from the

      • by Ecuador ( 740021 )

        Wow. I had to look it up, but you are talking about the arrest of Stern Hu, who was born and raised in China, then got an Australian citizenship in his 30's, and he lived in China and was arrested in China for violating Chinese law. And he admitted to bribery.
        The Chinese did not kidnap a foreign national who was making an airplane connection in some random place. They arrested someone living in China for violating Chinese law. Well, they arrested four actually, the fact that one of those four at the Chinese

      • Trump should assign Mueller to look into her links w/ both China and Iran, then Mueller will have his hands full and stop harassing Roger Stone, Jerome Corsi and others.
      • AFAIK their claim was that they were controlling mineral prices using a cartel.

    • Has the U.S. government conclusively pierced [wikipedia.org] this veil?

      • by Aighearach ( 97333 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2018 @10:37PM (#57756800)

        That isn't what that means. That veil protects the investors, not the employees.

        The reality is that many legal protections are afforded to the corporation by the presumption that it wants to do the right thing; it isn't a person, it isn't self-aware, so it can't desire to break the law.

        So a law that bans a broad action, but where the individual steps are all otherwise-legal, then the crime falls on the corporation, and the individuals are all protected. And the corporation just gets a fine, because it didn't have intent, the sum of the (legal) individual actions simply added up to a crime.

        But when the individual actions were themselves illegal, then it is entirely the fault of the employee; the corporation can't intentionally want you to do something wrong, it is just a piece of paper. If you were ordered to commit a crime, that was your boss committing a crime, and you were the accomplice. So the corporation is protected. Still financially responsible, though.

        Here, the individual action violates sanctions, so that is an individual crime by the employee. And the resulting trade that the company was intentionally doing also is criminal. So a situation like this, you have a whole bunch of individual employees who committed crimes, but the corporation was aware of the trade and the people who should have stopped it didn't, so those acts land on both the individuals, and the company.

        I am not a lawyer. If you don't want to violate sanctions against Iran, don't trade with Iran.

        • by ghoul ( 157158 ) on Thursday December 06, 2018 @01:20AM (#57757438)

          The problem is that these sanctions are illegal (as in unilateral and not UN sanctioned) so for Huawei to actually follow the sanctions would be illegal and Huawei execs could be arrested for doing so. They cant win.
          US law has no validity outside of US. I dont know how Canada is going to extradite when no crime has been committed on US soil or Candian soil. This is just a kidnapping.

          • Yes. The US has a law for indirect sanctions, which puts sanctions on foreign companies that do not follow US sanctions. This is already very questionable, maybe even illegal, and fought against by the the European Union, and others.
            But how can they take the right to arrest someone for that? It is completely outside their jurisdiction.
        • So, a corporation isn't self aware when it comes to criminal acts, but its free speech is protected when it comes to campaign contributions [wikipedia.org]. I'd think any entity that needs the benefit of protected speech would have sufficient self awareness to desire to break the law, but I suppose sufficient self awareness to purchase politicians obviates any need for consistency.
    • It used to be that US just threatened you that you couldn't sell in the USA if you sold to these countries. Now that Huawei was banned from selling backbone telecoms equipment in the USA this is the kind of leverage they had to come up with...

      I doubt the Chinese will react well to something like this.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      US BAD (Score:5, Interesting)

      No more sense than Westboro around here.

    • Holding as a hostage for negotiation.

      Hostage? This guy was arrested for violating the law. It doesn't matter if you are Chinese, American or Lizard Person because your dumb ass is going to get arrested.

      • Actually it does.

        How would you like to be arrested for breaking Lampukistan law even though you are not a Lampukian citizen and never been have to Lampukistan?

        • If you do business within a country then you are subject to it's laws.

          • by bickerdyke ( 670000 ) on Thursday December 06, 2018 @05:00AM (#57757928)

            Sounds logical.... until you're thinking it through...

            So.. let's say some European country has money laundering laws that require you to report your bank accounts or international money transfers to the local law enforcement authorities.

            Coco Cola company does business with that country.

            So every Coca Coly employee going on vavation to Euro Disney or Heidelberg should be arrested on spot because Cocoa Coly Company did not report the sale of Coke Mexico to the EU authorities?

            Yes, if you are doing business in that country what you are doing in that country is subject to that countries laws.

            Just because your company is doing buisness in Japan does NOT imply you have to drive on the left side of the road in the town Whatever, Indiana!

            • So every Coca Coly employee going on vavation to Euro Disney or Heidelberg should be arrested on spot because Cocoa Coly Company did not report the sale of Coke Mexico to the EU authorities?

              Nope, just the decision makers. The CEO is the obvious choice in this case.

          • by gtall ( 79522 )

            Chinese laws? Bwahahahahaha...yes, their legal system is a paradigm of virtue. Can I freshen up that drink a bit for you, Comrade?

    • By now, that's probably not worth more than Google's "don't be evil"

    • I thought only terrorists think of this trick and a not a country that say "In God We Trust"?

      That depends on which god they trust. Currently, they seem to be following one best summed up as "stupid-Loki".

  • Such a joke. (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    * NAFTA has made Canada the USA's dog.
    * Iran apparently goes from friend to foe to friend to foe, depending on the mood of the day of the USA, and if they bend over backwards to be the USA's proxy vassal against Russia yet again. Nobody seems to even care about the average people who actually have to live there.
    * Trump is the first factor, that may be strong enough, to get the world to put an embargo on the USA. Let's be honest: It's only a question of time. (And if you scramble, to get rid of him, I must t

  • by Anonymous Coward

    What could possibly go wrong?

    • by Dunbal ( 464142 ) *

      What could possibly go wrong?

      You find out it's a dragon tail not a tiger tail?

      • Yes, and then you find out that a dragon is just a smallish salamander with bright colors.

        And easily eaten by an eagle.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by Anonymous Coward

    My understanding of the U.S. "sanctions" is basically the U.S. administration telling corporations "if you trade with them, we will not do any trading with you." In which they are technically within their rights.

    Arresting those who do not abide by those non-UN approved sanctions? That takes it to another level.

    Why the hell is Canada taking part in this? This is almost as legit as dissident arrest warrants that dictatorships routinely issue.

    • by bws111 ( 1216812 )

      Your understanding sucks. It is a violation of US law to export things from the US to be imported into certain countries (like Iran). You need a license to export from the US, and getting a license means you agree to the terms. She is accused of violating the export license. Why is Canada involved? Because they, like every other country not run by complete morons, have their own import/export laws, and expect international cooperation in enforcing them.

      • by ghoul ( 157158 )

        US Law is only worth tissue paper outside the US. These sanctions are not good in international law as they are not UN sanctioned and in fact are contrary to the UN treaty with Iran

        • by Dog-Cow ( 21281 )

          US Law is only worth tissue paper outside the US.

          The article is proof you are incorrect.

          These sanctions are not good in international law as they are not UN sanctioned and in fact are contrary to the UN treaty with Iran

          Sanctions need not be agreed upon by the UN to be legal. The UN does not negotiate treaties with sovereign nations.

          • by ghoul ( 157158 )

            The JCPOA with Iran was a treaty between 7 countries and sanctioned by the UN Security Council. Even at that time Iran knew a Treaty with the US is not worth the paper it's printed on so insisted on UN certification of the treaty. Hence breaking that treaty and imposing sanctions on Iran is illegal. US companies will do it as they are under US jurisdiction but Chinese companies will not break an international treaty just to follow a domestic US law.

      • WTO makes non tariff barriers illegal and open to challenge. Export control laws are non tariff barriers to trade. China would be within its rights to retaliate through tariffs or non tariff barriers of its own. Or it can just ignore the export control laws because it knows if US tries to enforce them they will be proven to be illegal at the WTO.

  • by schwit1 ( 797399 ) on Wednesday December 05, 2018 @10:45PM (#57756830)

    Julian Ku, a professor at Hofstra University Law School, wrote on Twitter that the move was justifiable. “US law prohibits exports of certain US-origin technologies to certain countries,” he said. “When Huawei pays to license certain US tech, it promises not to export to certain countries like Iran. So it is not unreasonable for the US to punish Huawei for flouting this US law.”

  • Recently French President Macron calls for creating an European army to reduce military reliance on the US; about 2 weeks later the French CEO Carlos Ghosn of Renault/Nissan was arrested for accounting fraud. Watch out, someone in the US government are letting their dogs out.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • We can't let her go. Our extradition laws are terrible. On of our citizens was sent to France on bad evidence to sit in a prison cell for three yeas in relation to a bombing [bbc.com].

      The headline is misleading because we only made the arrest due to our extradition treaty with the US. Not because we think she did anything wrong. The only reasons we wouldn't send her to the US is if we think she'd face the death penalty or torture. We don't judge on whether or not the case is stupid. China won't be made at us for hon

Real Programmers don't write in PL/I. PL/I is for programmers who can't decide whether to write in COBOL or FORTRAN.

Working...