Front Burner - Was a Canadian's death sentence in China an act of diplomatic retribution?

Episode Date: January 15, 2019

A Chinese court has sentenced Canadian Robert Schellenberg to death for drug smuggling. His retrial was announced a few weeks ago, amid growing tensions between Canada and China. The CBC's Asia correspondent Sasa Petricic explains how this death sentence is being seen as retribution for the arrest of Huawei's Meng Wanzhou.

Hey there, I'm Kathleen Goltar and I have a confession to make. I am a true crime fanatic. I devour books and films and most of all true crime podcasts. But sometimes I just want to know more. I want to go deeper. And that's where my podcast Crime Story comes in. Every week I go behind the scenes with the creators of the best in true crime. I chat with the host of Scamanda, Teacher's Pet, Bone Valley, the list goes on. For the insider scoop, find Crime Story in your podcast app. This is a CBC Podcast. Hello, I'm Jamie Poisson. I'm Jamie Poisson.

Canadian Robert Schellenberg has been locked up in China since 2014, convicted and sentenced to 15 years as an accomplice to drug trafficking. And obviously when he managed to get his 2018 sentence appealed, he was hoping it would be less severe. Well, that is not what happened. Instead, a one-day retrial was ordered by the Chinese government, and on Monday he was sentenced to death. Canada is condemning the death sentence of a Canadian in China.

Trudeau said he was concerned Beijing had, quote, arbitrarily decided to impose the death penalty. We are extremely concerned, as should be all countries around the world, that China is choosing to act arbitrarily. Prosecutors claim they had new evidence that proved he played a key role in an international drug syndicate. Schellenberg said he was framed. A judge sentenced him to death in under an hour. Schellenberg is 36.

He's from the Vancouver area and worked in Alberta's oil patch before traveling to Thailand and then China. His family, along with a growing chorus of experts, fear he's the latest bargaining chip in an escalating feud between China and Canada. Right after China had started an international campaign to put pressure on Canada, it's just too much of a coincidence that this would be happening. Today, I'll be talking to the CBC's Sasha Petrasik, our China Bureau Chief. This is FrontBurner. Hi, Sasha.

Hello. Thanks so much for joining us. I know it's really late where you are. No problem. It's been a long day. As you know, on Monday, a Chinese court sentenced Canadian Robert Schellenberg to death on drug charges. Can we go over what happened on Monday? Well, there was a court hearing, a retrial in Chinese court terms. The prosecution came forward and asked for a tougher sentence, in fact, introduced new

charges. And there was evidence that was presented. There were financial records. There was a witness who was brought forward. Presumably, all of this was something that was new. And at the end of the day, after an hour of deliberation, the judge came back and said that Mr. Schellenberg, Robert Schellenberg, would be sentenced to death, which is the maximum sentence that could be presented. That seems like a very quick turnover. When I had heard this weekend that this retrial was happening, I assumed that it would be going on for weeks it is very quick it's very quick by any standards I think internationally and even here in China when you especially when you consider that the first trial that Robert Schellenberg went through he was arrested way back in 2014 it took two years for that to reach a court. And then it took the courts another two years to actually come up with a verdict and to sentence him to 15 years in prison. we do that? You mentioned that Schellenberg was arrested in 2014, and he had this original trial that lasted two years. What was he originally arrested for? And what happened in that first

trial? He was arrested for drug trafficking, a fairly simple, straightforward charge, although in China, that is very, very severe. You know, he was already in big trouble to start with, but he was considered someone who was caught up in trying to export drugs, but he was an accomplice in all of this. He wasn't the ringleader. We don't really know what evidence was presented the first time around because his first trial was treated the way most trials are in China, which is that they're very opaque. You do not see what's going on. You don't even hear about them in most cases until after they're finished. In many cases, there aren't even defense lawyers that we would expect. So there really isn't a lot of good information about

what happened during his first trial. He basically surfaced when that first verdict was announced, when he was sentenced to 15 years in prison, and when all of this then started to become much more public. Emily Rahala writes about Canada and foreign affairs for The Washington Post. You know, we don't know their exact motive here. It's hard to know because the system is so opaque. But it is definitely unusual for the Chinese government to invite foreign reporters to witness a trial. It's the party's willingness to advertise the case and to go public with it.

Do we know anything about what kind of drugs he was originally accused of importing or how much of those drugs? Yes, he was charged with trying to export some 222 kilograms of methamphetamines. And we didn't know how he was going to be doing that, at least not until today. But he was involved somehow in trying to get them from China to Australia. And that was the original charge that he was brought up and found guilty on. So what do we know about this new evidence that the Chinese prosecutors presented at this retrial on Monday? All of this evidence was geared toward trying to convince the court that Robert Schellenberg was in fact a kingpin, that he was running this drug trafficking operation and not that he was just an accomplice or caught up in this and didn't really know what was going on. So what they presented were financial records to start with, bank records, telephone records showing that he had contact with others in China who have been convicted of drug crimes and basically trying to show that he

was at the center of a very complex web and that he was also profiting from this. So that was one aspect of it. And then they had this one person who they presented, they put on the stand, a man by the name of Xu Qing, who on the face of it was Robert Schellenberg's translator. He was supposed to be showing him around and helping him as a tourist. In effect, what the testimony at the new trial, at the retrial was, was that Schellenberg was calling the shots and that these two were going around from hardware store to other places and buying tools and equipment in order to package these drugs and to get them ready for export. And so this was a major business operation that the two of them were involved in. And this man was essentially taking orders from him. And what do we know about what Robert Schellenberg said at this retrial? What was his defense?

He didn't say very much. He basically said that he was innocent, that this was, in fact, ridiculous, that he was not involved in these things. But it doesn't look like anything that he said or his lawyer said had much of an impact. Evan Dyer is a senior reporter with the CBC's Parliamentary Bureau. It's not unusual for China to sentence drug dealers to death. And this is a serious drug trafficking case. 222 kilograms of methamphetamine that Schellenberg is accused of trafficking. A Chinese citizen caught with that kind of quantity in that kind of case might well expect to be executed. But there are some unusual features that China experts are pointing to.

One is that it's a Westerner, and China has executed, for example, a British citizen a few years ago for drug trafficking. It does happen, but it's uncommon, particularly when the person is not a dual national, as is the case here. Schellenberg is not a Chinese citizen. And I just want to go over again how this retrial came about. It was ordered on December 29th, so just a couple of weeks ago. And of course, it's hard not to mention that this order came weeks after Canada arrested Meng Wanzhou, the Chinese executive of telecom company Huawei, in BC for extradition to the US. Canadian officials say she was arrested on Saturday, the same day as China and the US signed a temporary trade war truce. And that happened at the beginning of December. So this

is all happening in a much larger context. What do you make of the timing of this? It seems to be a huge coincidence that the courts and the prosecutors would decide to go after someone like this and to bring forward new evidence and really to make this into a much more serious case than it was to start with. And that this would happen right after China had started a pretty major international campaign to put pressure on Canada to release Meng Wanzhou, the Huawei executive that you mentioned. on Canada to release Meng Wanzhou, the Huawei executive that you mentioned. You asked what kind of consequences there would be, said a foreign ministry spokesman today. I can tell you in one sentence, he said, it's totally up to Canada.

It's just too much of a coincidence that this would be happening. I have to say that both China and Canada have avoided making the direct link between these two cases. But pretty much everybody else has made that link. Experts, scholars, people who have studied the Chinese diplomacy, the Chinese legal system, Chinese politics. Pretty much everybody else has clearly said these two are connected. And it really does seem like too much of a coincidence for them to have just happened that way. Guy Saint-Jacques is a former Canadian ambassador to China. The fact that this was done around the initial part of the Meng Wanzhou case, they invited foreign journalists to attend the trial.

And therefore, I think all this was orchestrated. And the death sentence was something that was predetermined. The prime minister was asked about this on Monday morning. He accused China of acting arbitrarily here. It is of extreme concern to us as a government, as it should be to all our international friends and allies, that China has chosen to begin to arbitrarily apply death penalty in cases facing, as in this case, facing a Canadian. What do you make of those statements, which I think could be classified as cautious? Canada has been taking a rather cautious approach because this has landed in the realm of diplomacy.

And I don't think that it's in anybody's interest or Canada doesn't consider it in its interest to raise the volume and to get into a shouting match with China. But the fact that it is accusing China of arbitrary actions is probably diplomatic code for saying that you don't really have a good reason for doing this. You're doing it for political reasons. You're doing this for, you know, to get what you want, not because there is a real legal case. And it is exactly the same terminology that Canada has used with the cases of the other two Canadians

who have been detained here in China, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, the former diplomat, one of them, the other one, a businessman. have been detained here in China, Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor, the former diplomat, one of them, the other one, a businessman. It is unfortunate that China has arbitrarily and unfairly detained two Canadian citizens, and indeed, in one of the cases, is not respecting the principles of diplomatic immunity. Both of those have been accused of espionage, very serious charges as well. And Canada has been working to try to get them released as well. It's demanded their release.

But it has also accused China of making arbitrary accusations against them. So clearly, it's trying to put all three of these cases into kind of the same category without actually making that connection to the Huawei case. I know too Canada has tried to ratchet up international pressure towards China. We've been making a lot of overtures to get our allies to jump in here,

which they have made several statements with regards to Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig. International allies are coming to Canada's defense over the ongoing dispute with China. The UK and United States are now voicing their support along with the European Union. Do you think that the same thing could happen here? I think it's a lot less likely.

I think China's strategy with this was that this was going to be a relatively low risk political action and legal action that they would be taking. Don't forget, we're talking about someone who has been convicted as a drug trafficker. And there's not a lot of countries in the world and diplomats in the world and leaders that are going to come forward and come to the defense of someone who is on the surface of it a drug trafficker and has been found guilty of that. It looks like China chose this case very carefully, very deliberately. Drug dealers don't get a lot of international sympathy. So Canada is going to be working on behalf of Robert Schellenberg. But it's not likely we're going to be hearing the same kind of voices as we've heard with the other cases. What do we know about how Canada has been dealing with this case in particular?

For example, were there any representatives at this retrial? Yes, there were. were there any representatives at this retrial? Yes, there were. You know, the interesting thing about this retrial is that there were consular officials there, Canadian consular officials. Schellenberg had a lawyer with him. And on the surface of it, this looks like it was being done in the same way that you might expect a trial in the West or in Canada to be presented. So on one level, perhaps that's not surprising, but it is very surprising for China because that's not normally the way that trials are presented here. They're not normally open to international media. really looks like China was going out of its way to try to present this as perhaps an equivalent trial to the one that Meng Wanzhou is having in Canada, that its system can act exactly the same

way as a Western system can. And on the face of it, you could make that argument. But we have to remember that in China, the court system is really just another government department. That's the way it's considered. If there is a national goal, if there is a national priority that's put forward, a political priority or a diplomatic priority, then the courts will be used to that end. That's so interesting to hear that, especially because China has been accusing Canada of illegal actions when it comes to detaining Meng Wanzhou. I don't know whether you paid attention to the treatment or the human rights of the Chinese citizen who was illegally detained in Canada. Yes, it has. You know, a lot of that has been talking points and propaganda. And China has been very good over the past few years at presenting, you know, sort of a face of outrage when it feels like it's been insulted internationally. And there's no question that it feels insulted by that arrest in Vancouver.

But it also, at this end, has been taking an increasingly hard line against anybody that it doesn't like. The Xi Jinping era has been marked by human rights lawyers being arrested, being put on trial, perhaps after several weeks or months, you know, showing up on TV with some sort of a confession, which is usually perceived to be coerced. So that's the sort of atmosphere we're talking about here. And the kind of statements that we've had from China criticizing Canadian legal systems really are part of the propaganda system. They're really part of this whole effort to put pressure on Canada to try to get a Chinese citizen, a high-profile Chinese citizen, released. Sasha, now that this death penalty verdict has come down, what could happen next to Robert Schellenberg?

They've taken a really hard line against him. And we can see this in the way that they have used this law. There is a provision that the death sentence could be commuted to life in prison. They didn't do that. There is also a provision where they could delay the death sentence. They didn't give him that option. So really, at this point, he has the option of appealing the death sentence within 10 days. It's a very quick process. And to be honest, based on how this has been handled, how much it seems to be part of China's strategy in terms of dealing with Canada,

in terms of this big issue that we've been talking about, it doesn't look like there's a lot of chance that this would be successful. But I would imagine that he would take that opportunity. So it's conceivable that this death sentence could be enacted very quickly? That is conceivable. Or it's possible that they will keep, that China will keep everybody guessing, and the death sentence will be hanging over his head,

and that maybe there could be some kind of a deal that could be struck with Canada. And I would be surprised if China actually carried out this death sentence immediately, because at that point, they lose that bargaining power. Sasha, thank you so much for taking the time to talk to us today about this developing story. My pleasure. Late Monday night, Robert Schellenberg's family released a statement. They said they care about Robert deeply, and that they're working with local members of Parliament

to make sure the Trudeau government makes, and I quote, every effort to secure fair treatment for Robert. After this recent escalation in diplomatic tensions, Canada has also updated its travel advisory for China. It's suggesting that Canadians exercise a, quote, high degree of caution in China due to the risk of arbitrary enforcement of local laws. I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks for listening to FrontBurner. It's 2011 and the Arab Spring is raging. A lesbian activist in Syria starts a blog.

She names it Gay Girl in Damascus. Am I crazy? Maybe. As her profile grows, so does the danger. The object of the email was, please read this while sitting down. It's like a genie came out of the bottle and you can't put it back. Gay Girl Gone. Available now.