The Federal court of Canada ruled on Feb. 3 the rejection of Lai Changxing's appeal to the court for the "refugee status." As the court deems, there is no evidence indicating that Lai will suffer from persecution when sent back to China, so he and his families are not entitled to assume "refugee status." The verdict says the previous sentence of the refugee panel, saying that Lai Changxing and his wife and three children couldn't have the "refugee status" is correct. So far the court does not find any evidence showing Lai will be persecuted for political reasons after his repatriation to China.  

As a prime culprit of Xiamen Yuanhua smuggling case, Lai Changxing understood well that he could by no means escape from severe punishment if caught by the Chinese judicial organs. That is the reason why he began to apply for a refugee status as soon as he arrived at Canada in August 1999. Lai hoped to gain refugee status by taking advantage of western country's insufficient knowledge of the Chinese judicial system and crimes he committed in an attempt to escape from criminal accusation in China.

In June 2001, Canadian Refugee Board officially conducted trial of Lai's refugee status. Lai's lawyer made great efforts to get Lai a refugee treatment by finding various excuses and pretexts. The major means resorted to include: 1.Denying facts shamelessly. They distorted the fact that Lai was suspected of involving in smuggling, bribery crimes and interpreted prosecution to Lai by Chinese judicial organs as political persecution. Meanwhile, they tarnished Chinese judicial system by claiming that Lai would receive unfair treatment once sent back to China. 2. Delay the process. Due to the complexity of appealing procedures for refugee case, Lai's lawyer wished to bring Lai's case to the final link through trial, reexamination and appeal. He even claimed at the beginning to bring the case up to the highest court.

However, the longest trial of a refugee case in Canadian history was out of Lai's expectation. In June 2002, the Canadian Refugee Board rejected Lai Changxing's application for a refugee status. Instead, it confirmed his fugitive status rather than a refugee, because the Immigration Department of Canada had carried out an in-depth investigation regarding Lai's activities in China, and concluded that Lai did involve in smuggling and bribery, which is a serious crime both in China and in Canada. Lai's case is not a political one. In addition, the Chinese government has never given up efforts to bring Lai Changxing on trial. As requested by Canadian departments, the Chinese government dispatched officials with Public Security organs, procuratorial organs and scholars in the related fields to Canada to give testimony to Lai's case. Except for testimony, they also introduced the progress and present situation of China's criminal legal system, criminal litigation, and lawyer system to Canadians. In the meantime, they clarified some misunderstanding and misunderstanding of Chinese judicial system and refuted some unreal judgments.

No sooner than the sentence was made did Lai's lawyer lodge an appeal of the case without any delay. But with enhanced cooperation in combating transnational crimes since 9.11, Lai Changxing can no longer escape punishment by refugee status.

On the one hand, Canada is not willing to become criminals' asylum. The trial of Lai Changxing's case has already cost 10 million Canadian dollars, causing a universal dissatisfaction among the Canadian citizens. The Canadian media named Lai the "most unwelcome guest. Canada does not want Lai's case affect its increasingly closer cooperation with China in the fields like anti-doping and counter money laundry. On the other hand, the purpose of Federal government's judicial investigation is to determine whether the decision of the Federal Immigration Department is reasonable, rather than to decide if Lai is guilty. The Federal Immigration Department only needs to show that Lai Changxing is not a credible refugee applicant by giving conclusive evidence and sufficient reasons, and there's no need to collect more evidences with regard to the formation of a criminal case.

The rejection of Lai's appeal greatly has raised the possibility of Lai's extradition but this does not mean he will be sent back soon. The Canadian Federal Court permits Lai to raise doubts about the conviction before Feb 17, which grants him a chance of seeking another trial. The Federal Immigration Department and Federal Court may further review Lai's "risk of repatriation."

Due to the lack of extradition agreement between China and Canada, there will be some technical problems for formal extradition of Lai Changxing. The two country's judicial organs need further negotiation and coordination to solve the problem caused by the principle of "no extradition of criminals to countries that use death penalty" and the recovery and confiscation of profits made from Lai's crime.

(People's Daily February 10, 2004)