Canadian Man Sentenced to Death in China

Feud sparked by Huawei CFO’s arrest in Canada continues to rage on

Tensions between Beijing and Ottawa continue to escalate, as a Canadian man was sentenced to death on Monday in China’s northeast province of Liaoning. In November, The Dalian Intermediate People’s Court sentenced Robert Lloyd Schellenberg to 15 years in prison on charges of mass drug smuggling. Earlier this month, prosecutors appealed the decision, stating that the sentence was too lenient due to evidence of Schellenberg’s involvement in international organized drug crime. Within 20 minutes of Schellenberg’s second appearance, the court decided to send the case to a retrial. 

In a blog post, George Washington University’s Chinese law expert Donald Clarke stated that the speed at which the court decided to retry the case was highly suspicious, and indicated that the decision had been made prior to Schellenberg’s court appearance. He also stated that the extraordinary speed with which the retrial was scheduled is indicative of the case being used as diplomatic retaliation. 

“Schellenberg’s retrial has been scheduled for January 14, a mere 16 days after the appeal decision. This is barely time for the minimum 10 days’ notice of trial required by China’s Criminal Procedure Law (Art. 187), and it is not clear that notice was in fact provided on or before January 4 as required. Given that the prosecution apparently plans to make new allegations that would justify the imposition of a death sentence, such a brief time is utterly inadequate for the preparation of a meaningful defence.”

All of this comes only a month after the Canadian arrest of Meng Wanzhou, the Chief Financial Officer of Chinese telecom company Huawei Technologies Co. After the arrest, the Chinese Embassy in Canada issued the following statement, “At the request of the U.S. side, the Canadian side arrested a Chinese citizen not violating any American or Canadian law. The Chinese side firmly opposes and strongly protests over such kind of actions which seriously harmed the human rights of the victim. 

The Chinese side has lodged stern representations with the U.S. and Canadian side, and urged them to immediately correct the wrongdoing and restore the personal freedom of Wanzhou. We will closely follow the development of the issue and take all measures to resolutely protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese citizens.

The request from the U.S. to extradite Wanzhou came after the U.S. uncovered evidence that she purposefully buried Huawei’s connections to a firm that attempted to sell equipment to Iran, despite international sanctions. 

The original warrant was issued by the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York; after the arrest, Canadian officials  confirmed Wanzhou was charged with “conspiracy to defraud multiple international institutions.” The charges of fraud include using a shell company over five years to avoid international American sanctions. Skycom, the company in question, was used to provide telecommunication services to Iran. While Wanzhou asserts that Skycom and Huawei are separate entities, U.S. officials disagree. In addition to the fraud charges, U.S. attorneys state that Wanzhou was actively attempting to avoid prosecution by the U.S., as she was found in possession of “no fewer than seven passports from both China and Hong Kong.” 

When questioned by reporters, Trudeau felt that the arrest would have little impact on diplomatic relations with Beijing, stating that the two countries had a very good relationship. The following day, the Chinese government issued a warning to Canadian ambassador John McCallum, stating that the arrest “severely violated the Chinese citizen’s legal and legitimate rights and interests, it is lawless, reasonless and ruthless, and it is extremely vicious.” The government also warned of “serious consequences” if the actions by North American officials were not remedied.  Shortly after the warning was issued, former Canadian diplomat Michael Kovrig was detained in Beijing, for “endangered Chinese security.” The unspecific allegations were not followed with charges laid by the Chinese government, and Prime Minister Trudeau has referred to the detention as arbitrary and unacceptable. 

A second Canadian has also gone missing in China. Michael Spavor, a Canadian business consultant with ties to North Korea, shared his itinerary on December 10 over Facebook for a lecture series in Seoul. Spavor’s plane was set to depart from China that day; however, he never arrived in South Korea. 

In a statement referring to both Spavor and Kovrig, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Lu Kang again accused the pair of being “suspected of engaging in activities endangering national security,” without specific charges being laid. Clarke also referred to the pair in his blog post regarding Schellenberg’s death sentence. 

“The case appears to reinforce the message, previously suggested by the detentions of Canadians Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, that China views the holding of human hostages as an acceptable way to conduct diplomacy.” 

The diplomatic tensions between Canada and China show no signs of easing during the coming weeks, and several former foreign officials have predicted that it will take approximately a year to resolve. President Trump and Prime Minister Trudeau have both appealed to the government of China to refrain from utilizing their judicial powers as weapons in the diplomatic spat, though their pleas remain unanswered. Meanwhile, Schellenberg has 10 days to appeal the court decision, although due process has notably been missing from many of the aforementioned court proceedings.

Social Credit and China

Social credit system plans for enactment by 2020

China has certainly not been a shining beacon of freedom in the world for a long time. But even for China, this is shockingly dystopian.

Credit is not a new concept to anybody in Canada. We’re all aware that the probability of a bank loan application being accepted, or a desired mortgage rate being approved depends on our credit rating. Our past ability to pay credit card bills, car payments and other regular fees on time is translated into a three-digit number, our credit score. Creditors use this number to determine what payment plan we qualify for or whether we qualify at all.

But what if this credit system was applied to everything, from business to private life? We need not imagine the circumstance. It exists in China today.

Known as “social credit”, the system works in much the same way as financial credit. Citizens are provided with a three-digit score based on observance of their ‘good’ or ‘bad’ behaviour. Going far beyond the scope of financial credit, social credit is based on judgement of all parts of a citizen’s life, from where they spend their money to who they have relationships with. The system was originally presented in 2014, and China has recently begun proof of concept trials for the systems implementation.

Utilizing China’s enormous spy grid of more than 20 million surveillance cameras, nearly every move a citizen makes is analyzed. The raw data of surveillance footage and online activities is overseen by an advanced artificial intelligence program, which uses complex facial recognition software to assign names to actions. A clean, calculating system for handling China’s population of 1.4 billion. The issue comes down to the matter of deciding what constitutes right and wrong action. This is, of course, up to the discretion of the so-called ‘Central People’s Party’.

The specifics of what makes good and bad behaviour remain mostly enigmatic. With that said however, we do have a few examples of offences, including: smoking in non-smoking areas, buying too many video games or playing them for too many hours, bad-driving, attempting to ride a train without paying, jaywalking, and disseminating ‘fake-news’ online.

A citizen’s social credit score can move up, or down. Consequently, there are rewards for high scores, and punishments for low ones.

Punishments are not few. A citizen with a poor score could have restrictions on their ability to travel. Many in test areas have been barred from taking business class rides on trains, and many more are blocked from purchasing domestic flight tickets altogether. Other punishments include: throttled internet speed, impeded access to luxury hotels, and restriction from certain high-status jobs for citizens marked as “trust-breaking.” Worse yet, those with a low social credit score may not be able to attend higher education or send their children to high-cost private schools. One final punishment that we’re aware of is the possibility for citizens to be publicly blacklisted as ‘bad citizens’, encouraging employers not to hire them. Supposedly, citizens will receive a notice before being added to the list and will be granted 10 days to appeal.

A few examples of rewards can also be estimated, based on what has been observed in areas that have begun experimenting with the system. The magazine Foreign Policy did a profile in the tester-city, Rongcheng, and found a list of benefits for ‘good citizens’. They included: Savings on energy bills, the ability to rent without a deposit, and improved interest rates with financial institutions. Other zones have reported that high scorers received special treatment at airports, fast-tracks to the best universities, and the ability to rent or purchase property in the nicest neighbourhoods.

The social credit system sounds outlandish to most of us in the western world. It brings to mind stories like George Orwell’s 1984, or Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World. So, it may be hard for some to believe that many in China are actually praising the system. Foreign Policy interviewed a denizen of Daxunjiangjia village, Mu Linming, who said that “Life in our village has always been good,” and “After introducing the system, it’s gotten even better.” It’s worth noting though, that in his village the social credit system mostly monitors how well one treats their neighbours and family members. But, in other cities, those who praise the social credit system have similarly cited that it improves public behaviour and rewards good citizens.

The obvious problem with the system is one of freedom. It is certainly the largest social engineering project ever undertaken in the world. It places immense power in the hands of a government that is already not well trusted globally, and it marks a major development in surveillance network and artificial intelligence technologies. It is conceivable that the system could be used to good effect, but the temptation to use it for evil would be present even in the best of hands. Time will tell if the system be used for good, or if it proves to be a nefarious tool for the Communist Party of China to tighten its control over the Chinese people.

Perhaps the social credit system’s aim is truly the establishment of a perfect society; however, utopia and dystopia are often just a perspective apart. Paradise for one, can be hell for another. Although human civilizations have strove for perfection for almost as long as they have existed, the tools now at the fingertips of the powerful capable of making dreams a reality, are nightmarish.

The social credit system will continue to be tested, with plans for full enactment by 2020. To our friends in China, be careful. In the words of George Orwell, “Big Brother is watching you.”