Www � Moxiu � Themes �search�� Mouse � Www �search�� Quickwpthemes � Themes ��search�� Catalog �” Szh � Catalog � Www � Www � Mouse �search�1� Szh �search� 06470000 � Catalog �search� Moxiu � Mouse � Themes �search�search�search�search� Www ��search�� Www � Moxiu �search�search� Www �search� Mouse � Szh � Moxiu �search�search����search� Www ��search� Www ��search� Www � Themes �%B2%F1%C1%E1%BD%FC%BF%F6�search�Phoebe+Hui+nipple��� Quickwpthemes � Mouse � Szh ��search�search� Www � Catalog �search� Themes �1��search� Quickwpthemes � Catalog � Www � Catalog �� 06470000 �search中search�search� Mouse � Themes � Www � Quickwpthemes � Mouse ��search� 06470000 � Www �� 06470000 � Www � Www �度� Www �search�� 06470000 �search� Www � Moxiu � Moxiu � Www � Www � Catalog ���search�� Quickwpthemes ��search��2�search��%D1%C7%D6%DE%D3%D0%C2%EB%D4%AD%B4%B4� Mouse ��� Moxiu �1� Mouse �search� 06470000 �� Quickwpthemes �� Szh �� Catalog �search�search�� Moxiu ��search� Moxiu � Szh �1�search�search��search�search近媒体广为报道的前中国银行哈尔滨分行官员高山等之外，尚有数十名从国内潜逃至加拿大的鳄鱼级贪官。他们卷走了中国数十亿美元的公共财产却没有受到应有的法律惩罚。中国与加拿大没有签订引渡条约，中国立法机构到目前为止才批准了中国与西班牙的引渡协议，中国与加拿大之间仅订立了没有很多实质意义的《中加刑事司法协议》，中国基本上通过外交途径解决引渡事项，有些事项则是依据《联合国反腐公约》及通过国际刑警组织来协调处理。中国遵照国际上普遍遵守的“死刑不引渡”原则，在发给加方的外交照会（编号为Note No 085/01）上承诺：“对赖昌星在遣返前所犯的所有罪行，中国有关刑事法庭不会判处死刑。” 加拿大一次不成功的法律改革加拿大引渡法有上百年历史，第一部《引渡法》制定于1877年，主要规范与引渡条约国之间产生的引渡法律问题。通常的情况下，一个国家一般在6个月至2年时间内就能完成引渡程序，但加拿大的反应可以拖延几十年。旧法要求引渡请求国要达到严格的引渡证据标准，其中包括提交其它与犯罪有关的人员的宣誓过的证词，这一要求是导致技术上的拖延的最主要原因。1999年，新引渡法生效，新法取消了上述规定，只须提交简易证据，法官可以快速判断证据的可信度。新引渡法旨在简化程序，缩短审理时间。一开始，新法似乎很有效，一大批积案得到快速审理。然而，政治气候促使最高院开始偏离法律本意，新法并没有实现法律改革的目标。加拿大除魁北克省为罗马法地区外，其他绝大部分都属于英美海洋法系的普通法传统，“遵循先例”的判例法原则修正了已有的新引渡法司法程序，联邦最高法院的一系列判例都强化了加拿大任何法律纠纷的解决都必须保障加拿大《权利与自由宪章》所赋予的权利的这一基本原则，这样基本上等于在已经简化了的引渡法上打开了许多缺口，这些缺口可以确保被引渡人得到尽可能多的法律救济选择，只要有钱打得起官司，可以在“申请—行政决定—不服上诉”等圈子里来来回回打得没完没了。于是，在加拿大，司法救济的路径对穷人和富人是不一样的。富裕的逃犯们可以奢侈地消费加拿大慷慨提供的众多权利选择，而穷光蛋逃犯则只有早早打道回府。

而最终的结果是，那些发了不义之财的逃犯们把赃款全部花销在加拿大本土并让加拿大律师们赚得油光满面之后，当成为真正穷光蛋时，也就是他们卷起铺盖回国受审之际。这样的法律设计，能说是公正的法律制度吗？受害国永远成为受害国。

No resolution in sight for top smuggler’s repatriation

(China.org.cn)
Updated: 2004-09-28 17:20

Lai Changxing, the alleged mastermind of a multi-billion-dollar smuggling racket in southeast China’s Fujian Province, has been wanted by the authorities back in China for five years. Lai was charged with being responsible for smuggling US$10 billion worth of goods in collaboration with corrupt officials, the biggest smuggling operation uncovered in China since 1949.

Lai began to apply for a refugee status as soon as he arrived in Canada in August 1999. In February 2004 the Canadian Federal Court ruled to reject his appeal for “refugee status.”

Vincent Cheng Yang is a senior research fellow with the Vancouver-based International Center for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy. He came to Beijing for the weeklong 17th International Congress on Penal Law that opened on September 13.

China Youth Daily reports Yang’s views on the Lai extradition case.

According to Yang, Lai is now in a lawsuit against the Canadian government. The court will probably not come to a decision on this until next year. His case is now within the jurisdiction of the Federal Court, which has placed a restriction on his movements as a precaution against him absconding. He will have only a few hours of personal freedom of movement each day until the court gives down its final decision.

“Suppose the Federal Court decision comes out next June,” Yang said. “Whichever party loses the lawsuit, whether it is Lai Changxing or the Canadian government, they won’t take it lying down and will surely lodge an appeal with the Supreme Court of Canada. This procedure usually takes several months. Then several more months will go by while the Supreme Court decides whether or not to hear the case. If the Supreme Court does eventually decide to allow the appeal, it will then take a long time for the case to be concluded. So judicially speaking, there is little prospect of an early repatriation for Lai Changxing.”

So what is actually making the resolution of Lai’s case so time-consuming?

“First of all Lai is a Chinese citizen alleged to have committed crimes in China. Such criminal acts would not fall under the jurisdiction of the Canadian courts,” said Yang.

“Evidence gathering is another thorny problem. To investigate Lai’s claim of eligibility for ‘refugee status,’ the Canadian government has already spent a tremendous amount of time collecting evidence from China to prove Lai’s asylum claim is untenable. In fact Lai’s case shows how experienced lawyers can use evidence issues to play for time in the Canadian court system,” said Yang.

“Meanwhile Canadian judges are not familiar with Chinese law. They would rather err on the side of caution and devote extra time to handling cases in which Chinese citizens are implicated. In short, it seems that as long as Lai has the money to engage lawyers, the lawsuit may drag on endlessly,” said Yang.

Canada is currently a favorite destination for China’s fugitive corrupt officials. So far, not one has ever been extradited back to China.

Although the two countries signed a Treaty on Judicial Assistance in Criminal Cases as far back as 1994, the effective implementation of the agreement has run into problems. In addition, since there is a wide discrepancy between their views on human rights, especially on the issue of the death penalty, the two sides have not yet concluded a full extradition treaty.

In order to facilitate the pursuit of its fugitive corrupt officials, Yang suggests that China should enter into agreements with the Western countries to split any money recovered.

In recent years China and Canada have intensified their judicial cooperation. The Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) has built and maintained a long-term partnership with China.

The two countries cooperate mainly through three main programs. The recently launched Sino-Canadian procuratorial reform and exchange program is set to run for five years. The Sino-Canadian legal aid and community legal services program started this year. Skills training for criminal defense counsels has been co-hosted by the Chinese Lawyers Association and the Canadian Lawyers Association for many years.

China asks Canada to deport alleged embezzler

China asks Canada to deport alleged embezzler

Globe and Mail (BEIJING) — Beijing is asking Ottawa to arrest and deport a fugitive bank manager who is accused of fleeing to Canada after embezzling $150-million from customers.

The case could aggravate Chinese complaints over the growing number of accused criminals who have sought haven in Canada. There is a mounting perception in China that corrupt officials and other criminals have found it easy to gain shelter in Canada.

Gao Shan, former head of a Bank of China branch in northeastern China, is alleged to have siphoned off huge sums from the accounts of customers and transferred the money illegally to an account in Canada.

He disappeared from China in 2005 after his customers reported the losses, but until now the Chinese authorities had never confirmed his location.
Related to this article

The extradition request could provoke further tension between the two countries after several years of friction over other cases in which Canada and China failed to co-operate.

Beijing remains furious over Ottawa’s failure to deport Lai Chang-xing, the alleged mastermind of a multibillion-dollar smuggling scheme in southern China in the 1990s. He escaped to Canada in 1999 and sought refugee status, triggering a court battle that continues today with no end in sight.

In another case, two Bank of China employees were able to reach Vancouver after allegedly stealing $570-million from a branch in southern China in 2001.

And in a third, Chinese citizen Ang Li fled to China in 2002 after the killing of his girlfriend, Wei Amanda Zhao, in a Vancouver suburb.

He was charged with murder after an RCMP investigation, but Beijing has refused to send him back to face prosecution.

In the latest case, China’s Ministry of Public Security has asked Canada to extradite Gao, according to a report on the weekend by the state-controlled Xinhua News Agency.

Now 42, he had sent his wife and daughter to Canada a year before he disappeared.

A report in a Beijing newspaper said Gao and another suspect, Li Dongzhe, are “currently under the surveillance of Canadian police” and could be sent to China without any difficulty.