D.卡尔顿 罗西
D. Carlton Rossi

Sun Qian Case



                              The SUN Case

Canadians do not like to be kept in the dark concerning non-transparent, secret talks and matters between the Chinese and Canadian governments. If an extradition treaty is a "long, long, long way off" according to Ambassador McCallum then why are representatives wasting time on the matter and not devoting more time to exploration of free-trade--whatever free-trade means. There really has never been free-trade nor will there ever be free-trade anywhere or anytime. However, there is an important issue that requires the full attention of consular officials in China; namely, the arrest of a Canadian on a Canadian passport who has been thrown in cell 414 under Article 300.

SUN Qiao is not free in Beijing First Detention Centre; although, she is a director, vice-president and co-founder of a bio-chemistry firm called Beijing Leadman Biochemistry Co., Ltd. The company was founded in 1997. The company is principally engaged in the research, development, production and distribution of in-vitro diagnosis products and biochemical raw materials. For a time, it seems that it was called Leadman Biochemicals Inc. as a Canada non-distributing corporation whose principal office was in Westmount, PQ.

Coincidentally, the foundation of this science based company which specializes in medical diagnostic tools was at the beginning of a rapid expansion of the transplant industry in China which began in 1999. God only knows where the organs came from; although, there is the suspicion that they came from unrepentant Falun Gong members.

Ms. Sun was converted to Falun Gong practices and principles in 2014. She believes it has helped her deal with personal, health issues. It may also be that in the past she believed that she was helping people by providing diagnostic services, but gradually became disillusioned with the reality of the situation. Today, it seems she places more value on the immaterial rather than the material. This circumstance led to her arrest.

With respect to exploratory talks on an extradition treaty one has to ask why weren't talks immediately called off on February 19, 2017 by the Canadian government on the arrest of SUN Qian who is a Canadian citizen. One cannot quietly downplay an event of this significance unless one is in a state of sonorous somnolence. There is nothing more important than defending her rights and freedoms.

Around the third week of March the Australian government failed to get the requisite support to ratify an extradition treaty which had been signed ten years earlier. "Political opposition to the treaty in Australia stemmed from concerns over China's humanitarian record, with human rights groups regularly accusing Beijing of obtaining confessions through torture." The cancelled vote came after three Australian employees of casino operator Crown Resorts Ltd. were arrested in November 2016 for alleged gambling offenses. Also, at the time of Li Keqiang's five day visit to China on trade issues, Professor FENG Chongyi who is a permanent resident of Australia had been detained in Guangzhou. Professor Feng was an advocate of political liberalization, but was detained for suspicion of threatening national security.

The Canadian government has wanted to take the easy route and use the China-Australia free-trade agreement as a template. However, how can it do this and not recognise the significance of the Australian government's inability to ratify an Extradition Treaty after 10 years? Why didn't the Canadian government take this opportunity to cancel "exploratory" extradition talks with the Chinese as an expression of dissatisfaction with the incarceration of a Canadian executive because of her religious beliefs and her expression of them? The Australians stood up for their Australian citizens and permanent resident while the Canadians stepped back from their Canadian citizen.

Why aren't "exploratory" extradition treaty discussions cancelled as of this date on May 10, 2017? This isn't once upon a long, long, time or fairy tale. Politically speaking, a long time can be hours or minutes for politicians who deal in slogans. Talks should be cancelled immediately for a period of ten years and then the issue may be reviewed. Canadians cannot morally negotiate an extradition treaty when any Canadian citizen is arrested and held hostage by a host country. We do not pay ransom in the form of an extradition treaty. We do not accept the harvesting of organs from Falun Gong prisoners under any circumstances. This practice is morally reprehensible and repulsive.

Furthermore, why did it take seventy-two days for Ambassador McCallum to announce the arrest of SUN Qian to the Canadian public through a return visit to Canada? He is no Confucius or sage in terms of the number 72. He may return, but she may not. Is it true that the only Canadian citizen who is safe in China is one who has diplomatic immunity?

Should not Canadians who had travel plans to China been apprised of the exact risk, too? The author had considered a visit to China during the 72 day period. He had been invited as a guest with full airfare and hotel paid. If he had known Ms. Sun had been arrested he would have made alternate arrangements.

A Canadian privacy issue is cited for the lack of a public announcement of Ms. Sun's arrest. Naturally, there is a balance to be struck between her privacy and the right of the public to be informed. However, do you really think Ms. Qian has any privacy in cell 414. She is monitored 24/7. Ms. Sun's case should be of the highest priority and of paramount importance for the Canadian government. It should have been brought to the attention of the Canadian public without delay.

However, cessation of exploratory talks on an extradition treaty may not be enough. If Ms. Sun is not released unconditionally and immediately then extradition of any and all Chinese-Canadians from Canada to China must cease for concern they may be tortured or ill-treated. In addition, a closer examination of Chinese immigrants may be necessary to weed-out corrupt officials. A civilized society cannot ignore defense of its cherished, core values which involve freedom of speech and religion. There are no trade-offs.

Simply put, China has an authoritarian government under rule by law; whereas, Australia and Canada have rule of law. There is nothing in common between the two systems. Why is Canada still enmeshed in exploratory, extradition treaty talks when China does not accept dual citizenship! Canada cannot walk (free-trade negotiations), chew gum (extradition treaty) and talk (individual human rights cases) at the same time. The triangle is irregular or scalene with unequal sides and angles.

Canadian negotiators are caught in a quagmire. Both sides have agreed not to talk of human rights as part of future, free-trade negotiations. That leaves only the extradition treaty forum for them to express their divergent views on human rights. However, the scales are not balanced when one side without rule of law arrests a citizen who enters on a Canadian passport and who ostensibly has dual citizenship which is not recognized by the PRC. This is further reason to permanently cancel exploratory, extradition treaty talks. To pursue talks sends mixed messages and is a sign of weakness.

The scales were not balanced either last September when Canada agreed to talk about the prospect or non-prospect of an extradition treaty with China. The evangelical, Christian Kevin Garratt who is a Canadian citizen had been charged with spying and stealing state secrets and held for two years. The government claimed there was no linkage between his release and Canada's agreement to talk about an extradition treaty. Is China going to pile up prisoners in order to persuade Canada to continue extradition talks and eventually wear it down to sign a treaty?

No one has forgotten the arrest of the Canadian citizen, Zhang Kunlun, because he was a member of the Falun Gong. The extradition issue, trade prospects and human rights issue were prominent at that time, too. It was just before the arrival of Prime Minister Chrétien and his trade delegation. One can no longer claim to be two innocents in China (Trudeau in 1949), nor a leader of Team Canada with Foreign Affairs Minister (Chrétien and Manley) who did not recast their mission as trade and human rights (2001) nor a proponent of sunny ways (Trudeau 2017) and be excused on the basis of naïveté or with Eyes Wide Shut.

D.卡尔顿 罗西
D. Carlton Rossi