Lawyers for Huawei executive Meng Wanzhou on Thursday accused Canadian authorities of destroying evidence, saying federal police wiped the emails and computers of a senior officer involved in her extradition case.
Meng, the Chinese telecom giant’s chief financial officer, is fighting extradition to the United States where she faces charges of bank fraud and conspiracy related to a Huawei subsidiary’s alleged violations of US sanctions on Iran.
Both Meng and Huawei deny any wrongdoing.
In court documents, defence lawyers allege Canada breached Meng’s rights when the Royal Canadian Mounted Police deleted computer files, text messages and e-mails of staff sergeant Ben Chang after he retired from the force in 2019.
Chang sent an e-mail to the US FBI after Meng’s arrest, which her lawyers suggest improperly contained her electronic device passcodes and serial numbers.
The attorney general of Canada denied the allegation.
“There is no evidence that the RCMP or CBSA (Canada Border Services Agency) engaged in the systemic destruction of evidence,” the office said in a court filing.
“There is no indication that the events alleged by (Meng) transpired.”
Chang, who retired to work in the Macau Special Administrative Region of China, swore in an affidavit he never sent any of Meng’s device information to the US authorities.
When called to testify, however, he refused to appear and retained his own lawyer, something Meng’s attorneys called “indefensible.”
“This destruction of evidence gives rise to a separate breach of Ms Meng’s rights,” her lawyers argued.
“This was done at a time when the RCMP and (the US Department of Justice) were put on notice of staff sergeant Chang’s relevance to the proceedings.”
The seizure of Meng’s cell phones and other devices during her Vancouver airport detention on December 1, 2018 was the subject of several days of her extradition hearings this week in the British Columbia Supreme Court.
One of her lawyers, Mona Duckett, alleged on Thursday that Canadian border guards and federal police conspired to obtain Meng’s phones and passcodes at the behest of the FBI, and did not have a legitimate customs or immigration reason to do so. Canada denies it breached Meng’s rights.
Government lawyers have called on the judge to throw out the allegations, which they said were “supported only by speculation and innuendo,” and proceed to extradition.
Meng’s extradition case is scheduled to end mid-May.
Meng told the Canadian court that border agents who questioned her at the Vancouver airport were “untruthful” when they said they handed over Meng’s phone passcodes to police by accident. Border officers also gave “vastly conflicting versions of key events,” Meng’s legal team argued as her extradition hearing entered the last phase of arguments leading to a final hearing.
Diplomatic relations between China and Canada have soured over the issue.
China detained two Canadians on suspicion of espionage soon after Meng’s arrest and they face trial this week and next, ramping up the tension between the two countries.
Defence lawyer Tony Paisana told a British Columbia Supreme Court judge the agents abused their statutory powers, and would not have acted as they did if they were conducting a “bona fide” border exam.
He asked why the agents took Meng’s electronic devices but did not search them, and why they asked for passcodes when they knew they would not use them.
Paisana said border officers who testified about accidentally giving passcodes over to police were “untruthful” under oath. “These officers deliberately tried to deceive you,” he told the judge.
The evidence suggested that the information was collected for the FBI, Paisana said.
Meng’s legal team has demanded her extradition request be denied, arguing that abuses of process took place during her arrest and that her rights were violated.
Canadian prosecutors have said Meng’s arrest followed established procedures.
Defence attorney Duckett said border officers who testified at Meng’s extradition hearings last year gave conflicting versions of important events. She quoted testimony from multiple border agents who were asked what authority allowed them to take phones and passcodes.
Although each gave different answers, she said none of the agents could articulate what reasonable grounds they had.
“I say the answer is because there are none,” she said.
The Canada Border Services Agency was not immediately available for comment.
On Wednesday, Paisana said Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers who appeared as witnesses last year provided “less than truthful” testimony when confronted with alleged abuses of process.
The RCMP declined to comment.
Meng’s extradition hearing is expected to wrap up in May, although a decision could be appealed, which would delay the final outcome.