The mere fact that there is a crime called fraud in both jurisdictions is not enough. The test is wether the pattern of conduct is criminal in both jurisdictions and the specifics of the alleged case very much matter. Just because the Americans see an actionable fraud offence in an act does not automatically mean that Canada does.Yes sanctions are a political tool.
However, she is charged with fraud.
This is a crime in Canada.
The US is asking for her extradition for an act that is both a crime in Canada and a crime in the USA.
The fraud relates to the alleged misrepresentation of the dealings given to a US subsidiary of the UK/Hong Kong bank that was or would have been a party to the transaction. I don't believe it is alleged that the US subsidiary was or would have been involved. At the time of the transactions there were no operative sanctions in Canada, China, HK or the UK. It is quite evident that the whole thing is only an issue due to the American's intent to insinuate their domestic sanctions policy to operate extraterratorially by means of leverage over businesses that operate in the US.
The Canadian Foreign Extraterratorial Measure Act makes clear that Canada doesn't necessarily stand still for this sort of thing, however the only specific regulation enacted under that act thusfar has to do with American sanctions on Cuba. I personally believe that we should operate it generally, but the AG has to decide. I am a little surprised that at lest the intent of the FEMA was not touched on in the decision.
The judge did think about whether it matters that the US sanctions exist as regards dual criminality and concluded that it certainly does. Absent the sanction rules there is no case to answer. She also considered whether there could be rules or laws in the US that would be rejected as a basis for a fraud charge and she pointed to unconscionable slavery laws that the courts had rejected as a basis for dual criminality in the 19th century. So for her the question come down to: could Canada have regulation similar to the ones in the US, even if it does not at present, and the answer is yes, it clearly could. I think this means that if the alleged fraud had been in relation to a hypothetical slavery or blasphemy regulation then the dual criminality test would have failed. But since it is in relation to a type of regulation Canada has and upholds, even if not an exact one, it does not.