White Culture

[rooster59]

U.S. says Huawei lawyer's prior work at Justice Department poses conflicts

By Karen Freifeld

 

FILE PHOTO: Surveillance cameras are seen in front of Huawei logo outside its factory campus in Dongguan, Guangdong province, China March 25, 2019. REUTERS/Tyrone Siu/File Photo

 

(Reuters) - Huawei Technologies Co Ltd lawyer James Cole's prior work at the U.S. Department of Justice created conflicts of interest that should disqualify him from defending the Chinese company in a case of alleged bank fraud and sanctions violations, U.S. prosecutors said in a filing on Friday.

 

Last week, the prosecutors filed a motion to disqualify Cole, who served as deputy attorney general, the No. 2 official at the Justice Department, between 2011 and 2015. But the motion was sealed and classified, and prosecutors did not make public the reasons behind the move.

 

"There is a 'substantial risk' that Cole could use 'confidential factual information' obtained while serving as DAG to 'materially advance' Huawei's current defence strategy," the prosecutors said, according to a redacted copy of the U.S. motion filed on Friday in U.S. District Court in Brooklyn, New York.

 

Neither Cole nor Huawei immediately responded to requests for comment. Last week, Huawei said it would "vigorously oppose" Cole's removal from the case.

 

The case against Huawei, the world's largest telecommunications equipment maker, has ratcheted up tensions between Beijing and Washington as the world's top two economic powers try to negotiate a trade deal.

 

The company's chief financial officer, Meng Wanzhou, daughter of Huawei's founder, was arrested in Canada in December at the behest of U.S. authorities for her role in the alleged fraud. Meng has said she is innocent and is fighting extradition.

 

In Friday's filing, U.S. prosecutors said Cole's representation of Huawei poses "irresolvable conflicts of interest."

 

As deputy attorney general, Cole "personally supervised and participated in aspects of" an investigation that caused the conflicts, the prosecutors said in the filing.

 

Details of that probe were redacted, but the filing said the Huawei prosecution is "substantially related" to the matter.

 

The prosecutors said Cole possessed information from his government work related to his Huawei representation that he could not reveal, and this created the risk he would rely on the information in breach his duties to the Justice Department.

 

Secondly, because the nature of the conflict is classified, the prosecutors said, Huawei cannot obtain enough information for them to waive any conflict.

 

The case against Huawei and Meng accuses them of conspiring to defraud HSBC Holdings Plc and other banks by misrepresenting Huawei’s relationship with Skycom Tech Co Ltd, a company that operated in Iran, putting the banks at risk of penalties for processing transactions that violated U.S. sanctions laws.

 

Huawei has said Skycom was a local business partner. The United States maintains it was an unofficial subsidiary used to conceal Huawei’s Iran business.

 

U.S. authorities claim Huawei used Skycom to obtain embargoed U.S. goods, technology and services in Iran, and to move money via the international banking system.

 

Last month, prosecutors said they planned to use information about Huawei in the case that was obtained through secret surveillance.

 

Cole entered a not guilty plea on behalf of Huawei and its U.S. subsidiary in Brooklyn on March 14.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2019-05-11

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

[Srikcir]

3 hours ago, rooster59 said:

"There is a 'substantial risk' that Cole could use 'confidential factual information' obtained while serving as DAG to 'materially advance' Huawei's current defence strategy,"

How horrible - a defense attorney using information to defend his client.

Unless Cole has signed a secrecy act document that forbids disclosure he should be free (and actually mandated) to use his knowledge and experience to defend his client to the best of his ability.

If the Trump DOJ wants to complain about improper use of alleged information, one needs to look at DAG Barr using false information to defend Trump. 

[Emdog]

But okay for pres to make his former tax fellas head IRS....

[Estrada]

So they appoint a former Boeing head as assistant Secretary of Defence and a load of lobbyists to various other posts then complain about Hua Wei. 

[from the home of CC]

bet they're choked they lost this edge..

[Mavideol]

3 hours ago, Emdog said:

But okay for pres to make his former tax fellas head IRS....

like Thailand, same same but different

[Nyezhov]

6 hours ago, car720 said:

You can't defend her because you know too much about how we operate.

What a farce.

 

4 hours ago, Srikcir said:

How horrible - a defense attorney using information to defend his client.

 

4 hours ago, Emdog said:

But okay for pres to make his former tax fellas head IRS....

 

1 hour ago, from the home of CC said:

bet they're choked they lost this edge..

A new record of ignorance on the first page of a topic. Congrats. But while you may think that this legal dispute played up the news is some type of magical political statement, May I refer you to the relevant Codes of Professional Resposibility, say ABA Rule 1.7 about things like prior representation and conflict of interest.

 

Now in this case, I dont have all the facts (nor probabaly does the journalist who wrote the article) but a good way to look at some of these legal disputes is to put the shoe on the other foot. So lets say Huaweiis former lawyer joined the justice department?

 

Some rules:

Just becasue the media seeks to sell you a news story as being important doesnt mean it is.

Not everyhting in the world has a hidden meaning.

Sometimes the rules are just toooo complex

[Redline]

Every person that has left the White House is lobbying, or in the private sector in law firms...he promotes this ????

[Nyezhov]

7 hours ago, car720 said:

Whoa.  Steady hoss.

To call people from various cultures ignorant offhandedly is way too easy also.  If it was as simple as that then the guy would not have accepted the job in the first place.  I don't think that he can exactly be called a dummy or he wouldn't be where he is.  Also, laws vary from country to country.

I don't think that any of the above comments were questioning the legalities of what they are doing.  I think instead that they were having an opinion on modern tactics.

One should base ones opinion on fact and knowledge. A solid rathouse with strong straws and clean rags