The results of the Meng Wanzhou case will be announced soon! There are indications that Trudeau wants to improve Sino-Canadian relations, and is there still a chance for Meng Wanzhou to avoid extradition?

Zhong Huang, Canadian Research Center, Institute of Country and Regional Strategic Studies, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies

The trial in Meng Wanzhou's case has ended, and the judge decided to announce the date of the ruling on the case on October 21. Although Huawei highlighted in its latest statement that Meng Wanzhou's rights were violated by the abuse of the judicial process, and the judge believed that there were many doubts about the Canadian prosecutor's allegations, we still can't expect too much from the verdict.

Of the 798 extradition requests the United States has submitted to Canada since 2008, only eight have been unsuccessful, meaning that Ms. Meng has only a 1 percent chance of not being extradited. Canadian prosecutors have mentioned that the task of judges is not to judge whether Meng Wanzhou is guilty according to the laws of other countries, but only to decide that the extradition process can continue in accordance with Canadian law, and the threshold for extradition is very low. Previously, the court had held that Meng Wanzhou's extradition case met the double criminal standard, and rejected Meng Wanzhou's lawyer's application to suspend the extradition process on the grounds that the Trump administration had interfered politically in the extradition case, as well as Meng Wanzhou's request to access and publish some confidential documents. Not only that, but the court also rejected Meng Wanzhou's request to introduce new evidence obtained by HSBC in the extradition trial. Although the judge acknowledged that the relevant documents of HSBC in the formal trial were valuable to Meng Wanzhou. Next, it is difficult to imagine that the court will make a judgment in favor of Meng Wanzhou.

If the court finds that Meng Wanzhou can be allowed to be extradited to the United States, and the latter abandons the complaint, then the ball is kicked in the hands of the Canadian government, that is, the Canadian Minister of Justice finally decides on the completion of the extradition process. But in fact, hopes of the Canadian government making a decision in favor of Ms. Meng are even slimmer. The United States has bilateral extradition treaties with 111 countries and has also made demands to detain Meng Wanzhou to dozens of countries, and only the Canadian government has arrested Meng Wanzhou. What is even more paradoxical is that, as Lu Kang, director of the U.S. Department of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said, the Canadian government did not say on any occasion which Canadian law Meng Wanzhou violated.

What's more, there are many factors that make it difficult for the Canadian government to change its position in the Meng Wanzhou case. First, Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau Jr. once said that no matter how the court decides Meng Wanzhou's case, the Canadian government does not need to apologize or explain the decision of the independent judicial system. The implication is that he can't go against the court's verdict and punch himself in the face. Secondly, the long-term fermentation of Meng Wanzhou and China's arrest of two Canadian spies has caused serious anti-China sentiment in Canada, and the opposition parties have taken the opportunity to exert pressure on the government, and Trudeau Jr. has not risked losing votes to uphold the motive of Justice for Meng Wanzhou. Finally, the United States did not give up the idea of extraditing Meng Wanzhou, and under the condition that Sino-Canadian relations were frozen, the Canadian government could not afford to offend the United States for the sake of Meng Wanzhou.

In fact, both the Trump administration and the Biden administration have been trying to extradite Meng Wanzhou through judicial procedures. The difference is that Trump once showed a tendency to "trade" in this case, and Biden chose silence. For the United States, the Meng Wanzhou case has the value of killing two birds with one stone, one is to demonstrate to China by suppressing Huawei, and the other is to divide Sino-Canadian relations. Before the Meng Wanzhou incident, Trudeau Jr. had expectations for the development of bilateral relations, and even expressed his desire to carry out bilateral free trade negotiations with China. After the Meng Wanzhou incident, Jr. Trudeau publicly said that he did not agree with the description of "genocide" in Xinjiang. Not only that, but Canada is so far the only country in the Five Eyes Alliance that has not taken a stance on banning Huawei from 5G. Under such circumstances, the United States, which is committed to strategic competition with China, is bound to want to tie up Little Trudeau, who has an independent tendency in its China policy, and also encourage the anti-China forces in Canada. As a result, the Meng Wanzhou case is a very effective rope, and it has indeed played the role that the United States wants.

Huawei said in its latest statement that it has always believed that Ms. Meng is innocent and has always believed in Canada's judicial system. Although Ms. Meng is innocent, it remains to be seen how Canada's judicial system is. It's just that we don't have confidence in canada and the United States anymore. (Editor-in-charge: Wang Xin)