On Thursday, Chinese telecommunications firm Huawei announced that it was launching a lawsuit against the United States government on the grounds that it had been denied “due process” over the banning of its technology from U.S Federal Government Agencies, a measure which was implemented by Congress as part of the 2018 National Defense Authorization Act.

In filing this lawsuit, Huawei representatives have argued that the United States government has not provided sufficient evidence that the company is a threat to national security, as has been repeatedly claimed, and that in turn the ban is a politically motivated means of preventing fair competition.

Although the chances of the court case are slim, the company's bid to challenge the American position on Huawei is a bid to defend its record against what has been an unprecedented political campaign by Washington enacted against it on a global scale.

Given the severity of the allegations being made against it, as well as the potential implications for the company's revenue, Huawei is taking a position that any other large business would take if they were facing such serious defamation, that being the legal route. Huawei is being forced out of a market, where it is popular, on political grounds. Does it have any other choice?

What is the National Defense Authorization Act? And how does it affect Huawei? The act is a comprehensive bill outlining the budget for the United States Department of Defense. The law has been passed annually under the same title each year since 1961. It is initiated as part of Congress' constitutional role in determining the budget of the United States.

In August 2018, the current version was passed and signed by Donald Trump. In its allocating of funding, the law imposed measures against Chinese telecommunication companies Huawei and ZTE.

Firstly, it banned them from being used in the infrastructure of telecommunication agencies. Secondly, it also prohibited funding for academic institutions that used the technology of those companies or conducted research with them on the grounds of national security (the latter provision has seen U.S universities being able to cut ties with Huawei as a result).

Given this act, Huawei's legal challenge to the act concerns the fact that the bill makes and assumes a number of accusations against the company that have not been based on any clear or public evidence, going against due process.

In doing so, the argument being made here is that the ban is unconstitutional, the company's lawyers note that legal rulings or provisions have been made on a given company or organization, which should otherwise be proved by a judiciary. 

On these grounds, they specify that the provision in the NDAA is unconstitutional because it is politically motivated on the grounds of inhibiting fair competition, in essence what they claim to be an abuse of political powers to utilize legal finalities.

Whether the case will succeed or not is unclear, as the specified constitutional overlaps between Congress' right to do so as a law making body, or whether such a decision is an exclusive right of the judiciary, is a difficult debate. Regardless of the outcome, Huawei is right to hit back and put this in the public spotlight.

One thing is clear from their perspective as to which the public should be made aware of: The United States government has engaged on an unprecedented, global and politically motivated campaign against the firm in order to purposefully derail its global markets and prospects in a cynical way. It is absolutely fair to say that as a businessman, if you are not willing to respond to that kind of assault against your enterprise, then is it even worth trying?

Indeed, it should be noted that the United States has spent the best part of the last year lobbying the world and pushing a narrative that Huawei's only purpose is a backdoor for Chinese espionage. On these grounds, it has asked countries to ban its participation in their 5G networks and also utilized criminal charges in tandem to further attack its reputation.

Few seem to realize that this effort has not been motivated by sincere security concerns but is instead a subtle extension of Trump's trade war. Contained within this effort, as even said openly by John Bolton, has been a goal to hinder China's advancement up global technology and value chains so that the United States might be able to maintain its hegemony in these fields, locking it out of Western markets.

The fact that only two countries have actually banned Huawei's participation in 5G, with a UK report playing down the issue as a “manageable risk” and others are ignoring Washington outright, suggests that an element of exaggeration and geopolitical motivation is at play.

All in all, because the Western media continue to accept America's narratives at face value, Huawei has ultimately found no choice but to speak up themselves against it. Their company should not be subject to politically motivated protectionism justified by inconclusive allegations. 

In doing so, this legal challenge will put the spotlight on the tactics which Washington is utilizing and pressure them to provide evidence behind their decision making upfront.