Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is an idealistic world view. In reality many high profile cases are determined primarily by the political clout of the entities involved. When it comes to nations such as the US we are going to get what we want on issues that are deemed significant. The recent Huawei case had a particularly interesting illustration of this.

Under US instruction Canada arrested Meng Wanzhou, the daughter of the founder of Huawei and a high ranking executive of the company herself. Following this event John McCallum, Canada's ambassador to China, stated that Meng Wanzhou had a strong argument against extradition for reasons including political interference from Donald Trump, the extraterritorial nature of the charges and the fact that Canada is not party to American sanctions against Iran. For context one one of those points, Trump himself has publicly stated he'd be happy to "intervene" in the case in exchange for a favorable trade deal from China.

Following internal pressure John McCallum released a message stating, "I regret that my comments with respect to the legal proceedings of Ms Meng have created confusion. I misspoke. These comments do not accurately represent my position on the issue. As the government has consistently made clear, there has been no political involvement in this process.". He was then fired by Canada's prime minister Justin Trudeau.

This does not speak to whether the charges are legitimate or not, but rather that people involved in cases like this are often in positions of immense pressure that undermines the entire system. McCallum had a 20 year political career. It's likely that his firing has now come with an implicit political black listing as well, ending that career. Such can be the cost of honesty in such cases.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/26/john-mccallum-...

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/25/i-misspoke-can...



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: