HKSAR v. NYANZUNDA EUNICE MAZVITA

HCCC 359/2024

[2025] HKCFI 4120

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 359 OF 2024

-----------------

-----------------

---------------------------------

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

---------------------------------

COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to trafficking in a dangerous drug on 28 October 2024 and was committed to the Court of First Instance for sentence. Today, she confirms her plea and admission of the Summary of Facts.

She pleaded guilty to unlawfully trafficking in a dangerous drug on 19 August 2023 when she entered Hong Kong through the airport, namely 1.04 kilogrammes of a solid containing 759 grammes of cocaine.

The defendant is a Zimbabwean national who arrived in Hong Kong on 19 August, from Freetown, Sierra Leone via Accra, Ghana, as well as Doha, Qatar. She was refused entry upon arrival in Hong Kong and escorted to customs clearance by an immigration officer. Her baggage was searched and nothing suspicious was found. However, she was physically searched and a customs officer found two pellets of suspected dangerous drugs in her underwear. She was taken to hospital and subsequently discharged a total of 90 pellets containing the cocaine of this charge.

She admitted she had swallowed the pellets in Freetown, Sierra Leone, on 17 August. She was offered a job of delivering the drugs in this manner to Hong Kong. She was in need of money and took the reward offered. She was given a phone number of the intended recipient in Hong Kong. The average retail value of the drugs at the material time was HK$1,278,160.

Mitigation

The defendant is now 35 years old, married with three children. At home in Zimbabwe, she was a self‑employed trader, earning approximately US$900 a month. Mr Polson has said all he can possibly say on the defendant’s behalf. Her best mitigation is her plea of guilty at the earliest opportunity. She committed this offence to better the financial circumstances of her family.

I have had, in the mitigation bundle, a letter from Father Wotherspoon relating how he has tried to assist this defendant in having those involved in recruiting drug mules arrested in Harare. I have read of information directly from the defendant being passed on to the police in Harare with specific details. But unfortunately, no arrests have been made. There is a letter from the defendant to be published to try and deter others from agreeing to become an international drug mule like herself.

I have seen a medical report from the Correctional Services Department and know of her diagnosis and health issues. I have seen a letter from a counsellor of her own village.

As far as mitigation is concerned, with an offence of this nature those personal details and health issues carry little weight. She was sick before she embarked on this crime, luckily she is receiving treatment in custody.

Sentencing

I have considered the approach to sentencing those that traffic in dangerous drugs. With the Court of Appeal’s guidance in the most recent authority, HKSAR v Lee Ming Ho [2024] HKCA 150, I now consider the six steps as set out in HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph [2021] 1 HKLRD 290.

Those six steps include assessing the gravity of the offence and the applicable guideline, identifying the defendant’s role, where within the guideline the defendant should lie, any aggravating factors, any mitigating factors, and lastly passing a sentence which is fair, just, and balanced in all the circumstances of the offence as well as the defendant.

The first step is to assess the gravity of the offence and identify the applicable guideline according to the drug seized. Taking into account the latest guidelines in HKSAR v Huang Ruifang [2025] HKCA 234, the starting point for trafficking in cocaine between 500 and 1,500 grammes is 16 to 20 years’ imprisonment.

Mathematically, the defendant trafficking in 759 grammes of cocaine attracts a starting point of 17 years’ imprisonment.

I am satisfied that the role of the defendant in this case was that of a courier, a position at the bottom of the hierarchy of drug traffickers. Therefore, the mathematical starting point should apply and is appropriate.

The fourth and fifth steps require me to consider whether there are any aggravating factors or any exceptional mitigating factors. The defendant’s culpability is increased or aggravated by the fact she imported a significant quantity of cocaine into Hong Kong. Bringing drugs across the border from overseas will attract an enhancement in a starting point. Considering the quantity of cocaine in this case, I increase that mathematical starting point by 1 year to 18 years’ imprisonment.

The defendant pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, and is entitled to a full one-third discount. After that discount is applied, the defendant is sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment.

I will reduce the sentence by further 1 month to take into account of the defendant’s contribution to Father Wotherspoon’s anti‑drug campaign.

With the last step in mind, I consider the sentence, although substantial, fair, just, and balanced in light of the circumstances of the offence as well as the defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant is sentenced to 11 years and 11 months’ imprisonment for this charge.