Earlier, some analysts said that if new evidence was introduced to prove that HSBC and its executives knew the relationship between Huawei and Skycom from beginning to end, it would be impossible for Meng Wanzhou to "cheat" HSBC on the relationship between Huawei and Skycom, and the objective conditions for the so-called "fraud crime" to be established were not available.
In addition, before the PPT presentation in Meng Wanzhou, HSBC already knew the relationship between Huawei and Skycom, and had enough information to assess the risk of cooperation with Huawei, instead of relying solely on the PPT presentation in Meng Wanzhou. If HSBC faces the risk of violation due to cooperation with Huawei in the future, the responsibility lies in HSBC's own compliance procedures, and there is no causal relationship with Meng Wanzhou's PPT presentation.
Huawei Canada issued a statement.
On the afternoon of July 9th, local time, the High Court of British Columbia made a judgment on Meng Wanzhou's application for introducing new evidence, and the judge rejected the application. Huawei Canada said in a statement that it respected the court's ruling, but regretted the result.
Huawei Canada said in a statement that although the court refused to introduce new evidence, these new documents clearly showed that HSBC and its senior management knew about Huawei's relationship with skycom and skycom's business in Iran. These documents also show that the prosecution record and two supplementary prosecution records in the United States are obviously unreliable. "The extradition hearing will continue, and we will continue to support Ms. Meng in seeking freedom and justice."
Refer to the above? Watch the news-Meng Wanzhou judge refused to introduce new evidence, Huawei: regret.