In a decision made public last week, Federal Court Chief Justice Paul Crampton barred engineering student Yuekang Li’s visa application to study at UW. The Court made this decision based on the argument that Li, who is a Chinese resident, could be pressured into spying by Beijing.
Li applied for a study permit in 2022, after being accepted by UW into the mechanical and mechatronics engineering program for his PhD. He proposed to study under a leading researcher and take his knowledge back to China to improve its public health system. UW professor Carolyn Ren would have been his thesis supervisor.
In the Dec. 22 Court decision, Crampton ruled that Li’s proposal fits under the definition of “non-traditional” espionage. “The court’s appreciation of what constitutes ‘espionage’ must evolve,” he wrote, noting that “hostile state actors” have been making use of new methods to gather information from Canada.
Li went to the Federal Court for judicial review after his visa application was rejected by a Canadian government officer, who deemed Li inadmissible on the grounds of espionage. Li then made the argument that the officer — who is currently unnamed — had taken an abstract view of “espionage” and relied too much on “speculation,” according to the Court decision.
According to the officer, Li’s research, which would focus on microfluidics, is connected to research in areas such as biopharma and advanced medicine. The officer said that Li’s specialization in a high-tech industry in China could cause him to be a target for espionage endeavors. However, Ren stated that microfluidics do not have military applications, and that her lab has never done research with military use.
Raymond Lo, Li’s lawyer, stated that nobody has actually accused Li of being involved with espionage. He added that it is unfortunate that officers are barring “such talented individuals” from entering Canada “based on what may possibly happen.”
Dick Fadden, former national security adviser to the prime minister, emphasized that the ruling is concerned with a general effort by the government to safeguard against espionage, rather than the individual case: “Whether or not Mr Li is or could be a spy is neither here nor there.”
Various experts have spoken about the precedent that this ruling could set, particularly with regard to university operations. Nick Manning, associate vice president of communications at UW, said the ruling “contains helpful guidance on the government’s interpretation of risk,” and that the university will review it carefully. Margaret McCuaig-Johnston, a board member at the China Strategic Risks Institute, added her view that more of these kinds of rulings will appear in the future. “This is new and I think it’s something [that universities] need to be watching, [to avoid] admitting students who may be a security risk,” she said.
