Song Kai said that Huawei’s revenue in the United States is negligible compared to the revenue of Huawei Group.
On December 5th, Huawei’s Shenzhen headquarters held a press conference to announce the formal filing of an indictment in the US court, requesting the court to affirm that the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) prohibits Huawei from participating in the federal government The decision to subsidize the funding project violates the US Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Law.
Huawei’s Chief Legal Officer Song Liuping said that Huawei has submitted multiple rounds of factual basis and objections, but the FCC completely ignored these factual basis and opinions.
Song Liuping, Chief Legal Officer of Huawei: The FCC ban is based on political rather than economic factors.
On November 22, the FCC decided to identify Huawei as a national security threat to the United States and ban operators in rural areas in the United States. Use the Universal Service Fund (USF) to purchase Huawei equipment. In the indictment filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, Huawei believes that the FCC directly determined that Huawei constitutes a national security threat and did not give Huawei the opportunity to refute the relevant allegations, which violated the principle of due process. Huawei also believes that the FCC did not provide any evidence or reasonable reasons to support its arbitrary decision, which violated the US Constitution, the Administrative Procedure Act and other US laws.
Huawei’s Chief Legal Officer Song Liuping said at the press conference, “We are banned just because Huawei is a Chinese company and cannot solve any cyber security issues.”
He said that FCC Chairman Ajit Pai and other committee members have not Provide any evidence to prove their allegations that Huawei poses a security threat. Since the FCC first proposed this proposal in March 2018, Huawei and American rural operators have submitted multiple rounds of factual basis and objections, but the FCC has completely ignored these factual basis and opinions.
Song Liuping said in the statement, “Huawei has also submitted 21 rounds of detailed opinions on the harm of the decision to users and companies in remote areas. But the FCC ignored all these opinions.”
He also said, “Operators in rural areas in the United States, including those in Montana and Kentucky’s small towns and Wyoming’s farms, chose to cooperate with Huawei because they recognize the quality and safety of Huawei’s equipment. The FCC should not ban Huawei. Cooperate with operators to provide connectivity services for rural areas in the United States.”
Song Liuping said that the FCC’s decision was the same as putting Huawei on the “Entity List” in May this year. It was based on political rather than economic considerations. . He pointed out that some US politicians ignore Huawei's years of cooperation with operators in rural areas in the US.
"If the FCC is really worried about the security of the telecommunications supply chain, then they should realize that any manufacturer's equipment in China has the same risks. This includes not only Huawei, ZTE, but also Nokia and Ericsson They are also producing equipment in China.” Song Liuping said that the US government has never produced any evidence that Huawei poses a security threat to the US national security because there is no such evidence.
"When asked to provide factual evidence, they responded that public evidence may also harm the national security of the United States. This is simply nonsense." Song Liuping said.
Huawei Chief Counsel: The FCC has no right to make national security judgments
Huawei's chief counsel Glen Nager said that the FCC should have formulated and issued rules for the entire industry, but in fact it was in several congresses. At the request of the congressmen, the FCC violated the law and passed this rule only for Huawei and ZTE without following the relevant standards.
"The FCC applied this rule to Huawei without any legal basis, and did not give Huawei the opportunity to exercise due process, nor did it provide any evidence.The rules go beyond FCC legal rights. "Glen Nager said that according to the U.S. Communications Act's provisions on universal service, the FCC has no power to make national security judgments. This power is owned by the President of the United States and not owned by a national agency like the FCC.
He believes that the FCC This preliminary determination of Huawei lacks legal facts and basis. It is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of Chinese law, as well as unreasonable, unreliable, and unacceptable accusations and innuendo, rather than on factual basis and evidence. "If the government If organizations want to take action, they must have basis and evidence for implementation. We believe that the U.S. Federal Court of the Fifth Circuit will invalidate this FCC rule. "
Glen Nager said that the FCC passed this decision only for Chinese companies such as Huawei without following the relevant standards, and the FCC itself admitted that it was against Chinese companies.
"We believe that the loss of reputation will Bring greater business impact to everyone. Fan Zhiyong, vice president of Huawei’s legal policy and IP strategy, said that fair market competition is a very important business environment for companies to participate. Huawei’s legal action this time was because the FCC defined Huawei as a threat to US national security. “This is not based on facts, not based on Evidence, but based on speculation. "
The FCC ban will cause some small U.S. operators to go bankrupt.
Huawei’s vice president of corporate communications, Song Kai, said that the FCC’s decision is not conducive to improving the level of connectivity in rural areas in the United States. The region relies on Huawei equipment to access the network, while other manufacturers are unwilling to operate in "very remote, difficult terrain, and sparsely populated" areas. He also said that the ban and subsequent releases to remove and replace Huawei equipment The proposal will bring hundreds of millions of dollars in additional costs, and even cause some small operators to go bankrupt.
Song Kai said that Huawei has built a network for US users in places where other manufacturers are unwilling to go. Even if these areas are too small, with inconvenient transportation conditions, or not profitable enough, the cooperation between Huawei and these small operators is what the company has been committed to doing, and this is also Huawei's right to do this.
"Other manufacturers have crossed out users in these regions from their customer lists and defined them as low-value customers, but Huawei will never do this. "He said that Huawei's equipment in the United States is mainly sold to 40 small wireless and wired operators, connecting schools, hospitals, farms, families, community colleges and emergency centers locally.
"These small wireless and wired operators It has set up a digital lifeline for local operators, which requires digital universal equipment. The FCC requires rural operators in the United States to remove Huawei equipment that has been installed in the network. This will bring hundreds of millions of dollars in additional costs. Operators said that if they comply with this regulation, they will end in bankruptcy. "Song Kai said that the more saddening thing is that removing Huawei equipment will not make the network more secure.
"Our competitors have a lot of equipment manufactured in China, and some even cooperate with Chinese state-owned enterprises. A joint venture was established, and their equipment is widely used in the US network. A member of the FCC once said that almost 40% of the U.S. networks contain equipment made in China. Aiming at Huawei will not change this status quo. Song Kai said.
A reporter asked whether the FCC ban would affect Huawei’s financial income. Song Kai said that Huawei’s revenue in the United States is negligible compared to the revenue of Huawei Group. Compared with Huawei’s 110 in the United States The purchase amount of 100 million yuan is also negligible, and Huawei's sales staff in the United States has been decreasing in the past few years.
Beijing News reporter Lu Yifu editor Xu Chao Liu Xiaoyang proofreading Li Shihui
(Original title: Huawei Why sued the US FCC? The detailed evidence in the 21st round was ignored and only speculation)
(Editor in charge: Yao Liwei_NT6056)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-