Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou’s lawyers have filed new arguments and evidence in court in her battle to avoid extradition to the United States.
In the filings, Ms. Meng alleges she is a pawn of larger tensions in the China-U.S. relationship. Ms. Meng also charges that the U.S. has misled the Canadian government and courts in its arguments for her to be extradited. For instance, Ms. Meng says the U.S. selectively quoted from a key presentation that she gave to HSBC bankers. That is a key piece of evidence in the U.S. case against her and the charges of fraud related to dealings in Iran.
Ms. Meng was arrested at the Vancouver airport in December, 2018, by Canadian authorities on the request of the U.S. Her arrest set a chill in Canada-China relations and led to the retaliatory arrest of two Canadians in China.
This is the daily Politics Briefing newsletter, written by Chris Hannay. It is available exclusively to our digital subscribers. If you’re reading this on the web, subscribers can sign up for the Politics newsletter and more than 20 others on our newsletter signup page. Have any feedback? Let us know what you think.
The Privy Council Office says it will hire an independent, third-part investigator to look into claims of workplace harassment in the office of Governor-General Julie Payette. Ms. Payette said she welcomes the review. The investigation follows a CBC report this week in which sources said employees of the office were often yelled at or humiliated, driving many to quit.
Some major corporate sponsors, including Telus and Virgin, are dropping their involvement with the WE Charity following the controversial awarding of a multimillion-dollar contract to the group and other questions that have been raised about the charity’s governance. The Globe and Mail has a media sponsorship agreement with WE that is set to lapse on Aug. 31 and will not be renewed.
Chief of the Defence Staff Jonathan Vance announced he will retire as soon as the government hires his replacement. Gen. Vance has been Canada’s top soldier since 2015. There is no clear heir to the job, in part because of the controversy that saw his vice-chief Vice-Admiral Mark Norman leave the military.
And the families of victims of the April mass shooting in Nova Scotia say they are not satisfied with a planned government review into the shooting, which fell short of a public inquiry that would be more transparent and allow for witnesses to be compelled to testify.
Andrew Coyne (The Globe and Mail) on the Safe Third Country Agreement being struck down by a federal judge: “Whatever case there may have been for designating the United States as a safe third country while George W. Bush or Barack Obama were president, it no longer exists. Outsourcing Canadian refugee policy was always a morally dicey proposition. In present circumstances, it is untenable.”
Robyn Urback (The Globe and Mail) on why Bill Morneau should no longer be finance minister: “Indeed, for a government that has long championed its connection to the middle class, a Finance Minister who can’t keep track of his holding corporations, his French villa and his $40,000 vacations should be seen as a distinct liability – to say nothing of what ought to be an intolerable and disqualifying ethical breach.”
Philippe Lagassé (The Globe and Mail) on Governor-General Julie Payette and the allegations of workplace harassment: “Governors-general who cause rows – owing to perceived biases, misuse of powers, or concerns about their suitability – undermine what is already a poorly understood and underappreciated office.”
Tim Querengesser (The Globe and Mail) on Alberta’s changes to municipal elections: “Alberta’s cities could yet persevere. But the darkest outcome surely now sits on the table: that Edmonton and Calgary, home to more than half of Alberta’s population – along with mid-size cities such as Medicine Hat or Lethbridge – see their councils diluted into glorified school boards that do the partisan bidding of their provincial governments.”
Paul Wells (Maclean’s) on the review – not public inquiry – into the N.S. mass shooting: “What’s to stop an RCMP officer from, say, retiring from the force and suddenly being institutionally out of reach of the review panel? Nothing, but thanks for asking. What’s to ensure you and I can see the testimony so we know whether it’s reflected in any final report? Nothing. There’s no provision for any public testimony, let alone for subpoena power or sworn veracity.”
Omar El Akkad (The Globe and Mail) on the federal crackdown of protests in Portland: “As expected, the release of federal pseudo-soldiers into the heart of a major U.S. city against the wishes of local officials has had the opposite of its every publicly stated intent. A protest movement that had begun to dwindle from exhaustion after two months of tear gas and mass police violence has suddenly experienced a stunning resurgence, fuelled by a new group of older, more privileged demonstrators who share a conscious or unconscious awareness that the violence the state unleashes on young Black activists, it might be more reluctant to unleash on white moms. Civil liberties groups have filed a bevy of lawsuits against the federal government, and the end result may well be a judicial reckoning with the Department of Homeland Security itself, an agency born during the post-9/11 frenzy of unchecked militarization and almost unbounded in its powers of arrest and jurisdiction.”
Fariha Naqvi-Mohamed (Montreal Gazette) on mandatory mask-wearing in Quebec: “Before the pandemic, a woman wearing a niqab who entered a hospital to receive care could be asked to remove it. Now, it’s a patient without a face mask, especially one with suspected COVID-19 symptoms, who will be provided with a face mask when they enter and be asked not to remove it while interacting with any staff or in the presence of anyone else. So if a niqab-wearing woman enters a hospital now, will she be asked to remove it in the name of secularism and then be handed a face mask? Just wondering. After all, Bill 21 is still on the books.”