Why alleged scam kingpin Chen Zhi was sent to China, not the US

Prince Group founder and chairman Chen Zhi has been deported to China for his role in wire fraud, raising questions about why he was not extradited to the US, which had previously brought criminal charges against him. Experts say the case highlights Cambodia’s heavy reliance on Beijing in geopolitical matters.

China’s Ministry of Public Security confirmed on 8 January 2026 that, with Cambodia’s cooperation, Chen was returned to China on 7 January and as a Chinese national. The ministry called this “another major achievement in China-Cambodia law enforcement cooperation”.

According to an official Cambodian statement, two other Chinese citizens were deported alongside Chen.

The US Department of Justice charged Chen in October 2025 with wire fraud, money laundering and other offences. His company, Prince Group, was also designated a transnational criminal organisation and subjected to severe sanctions. At the time, however, the Cambodian government made no allegations against Chen and expressed hope that the US would present sufficient evidence.

Following Chen’s deportation to China, Cambodian Deputy Prime Minister Sun Chanthol said on 8 January that “when we had all the evidence, we took action, according to the law of the land”.

Chanthol did not explain why Chen was extradited to China rather than to the US, but said that Cambodia cannot afford to choose sides, and stressed that the country’s guiding principle is to place Cambodia’s interests above all else.

Chen, 38, was born in China and became a Cambodian citizen in 2014. He was formerly an adviser to the Cambodian prime minister and was granted honorary titles, but was stripped of his Cambodian citizenship in December 2025 and subsequently expelled from the country.

Pavin Chachavalpongpun, professor at Kyoto University’s Center for Southeast Asian Studies, told Lianhe Zaobao that for Beijing, securing Chen’s return is a significant triumph for “Operation Fox Hunt”. It reinforces the reality of China’s long-arm jurisdiction, while also preventing a potentially transparent and high-profile trial in a US or UK courtroom, which might have exposed sensitive details.

Pavin stated that the Chen case underscores Cambodia’s deep geopolitical dependency on Beijing, and is an act of political pragmatism for Phnom Penh.

China is Cambodia’s largest source of foreign investment, a major investor in its infrastructure, and an important military partner.

Wang Jiangyu, a professor at the City University of Hong Kong School of Law, said in an interview that there is no dispute over China’s jurisdiction in Chen’s case under either Chinese law or international law. However, given that both the UK and the US have brought charges against him, Cambodia’s decision to ultimately extradite him to China reflects its prioritisation of China’s requests.

Agence France-Presse and Thailand’s The Nation reported that Cambodia came under pressure from Beijing over the extradition, “sacrificing” Chen in exchange for maintaining friendly diplomatic relations with China and safeguarding the reputation of the Belt and Road Initiative.

Pavin agreed with this view. Dylan Loh, an associate professor at the Public Policy and Global Affairs division at Nanyang Technological University, also noted in an interview that China probably exerted plenty of diplomatic pressure, particularly as the issue of scams is one that Beijing watches very closely.

Wang said that Cambodia’s earlier decision to revoke Chen’s citizenship already signalled a desire to sever ties, and that such businessmen “could be abandoned at any time”.

However, Wang also assessed that Chen’s extradition may not be a major priority for the US at present. Otherwise, “it would have come down to who applied greater pressure and offered greater returns, and who acted more swiftly and proactively”.

Pavin also thinks that Chen’s case may become a “model case”, signalling the end of the era of the “untouchable” naturalised tycoon.

“Naturalised tycoons” refers to wealthy individuals who are originally citizens of one country and later become citizens of another country through legal procedures.

Pavin said: “It proves that local citizenship and elite titles like ‘Oknha’ are no longer a shield if Beijing decides an individual has crossed a red line... neither immense wealth nor high-level local patronage in Southeast Asia can provide permanent protection for those the Chinese state wishes to repatriate... it will likely have a chilling effect on other naturalised business elites in the region, who may now feel increasingly vulnerable.” 

However, Loh does not think that Chen would become a “case study”. He explained this was not the first time China had extradited a suspect from another country, “nor will it be the last”.

This article was first published in Lianhe Zaobao as “太子集团陈志引渡中国而非美国 分析：凸显柬对华深度依赖”.

Related: How scammers are tarnishing Singapore’s incorruptible image | Chinese actor’s rescue recasts spotlight on telecom fraud