Chan, Dong Granted Access to Classified Information in Foreign Interference Inquiry Raises Concern for Diaspora

Beijing critics are raising concerns about the recent decision by the foreign interference commissioner to grant MP Han Dong and former Ontario minister Michael Chan access to classified information and the ability to question witnesses. Some members of the Chinese diaspora are worried about their safety due to the involvement of these two politicians.

Gloria Fung, president of Canada-Hong Kong Link, voiced these concerns, referencing media reports that cited Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) allegations against the two. She expressed concern that their presence could deter witnesses from speaking freely at the public inquiry.

In a Dec. 4 decision, Justice Marie-Josée Hogue granted full participation rights to Mr. Dong and Mr. Chan, allowing them to interrogate witnesses and access non-public information. Both men are facing allegations of involvement in Beijing’s interference in Canada’s 2019 and 2021 federal elections.

Mr. Dong and Mr. Chan are facing accusations of inappropriate ties to the Chinese consulate, and CSIS has raised concerns about their involvement in foreign interference. Former Conservative MP Kenny Chiu echoed concerns about the powers granted to the two politicians, stating that their involvement could jeopardize the country’s intelligence collection.

Concerns were also raised about the involvement of Sen. Yuen Pau Woo in the inquiry, given his past remarks and actions perceived as favorable to Beijing. A letter has been sent to the foreign interference commissioner requesting a reconsideration of the granted standings. However, concerns have also been raised about the exclusion of individuals critical of the Chinese regime from the inquiry, as their applications for standing were dismissed.

MP Michael Chong was initially excluded from the inquiry but was later granted participation rights. Former Conservative MP Kenny Chiu criticized the brief time allowed to apply for standing and shared doubts about the significance of the inquiry.

In general, the structure and vetting of the inquiry have undermined the confidence of individuals affected by Beijing’s interference. This has raised concerns about the fairness and integrity of the public inquiry.



Source link