HKSAR v. LI KA YIU

DCCC 926/2008

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 926 OF 2008

____________

___________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

1.  The defendant pleads guilty to one charge of trafficking in 67.86 grammes of a powder containing 47.48 grammes of ketamine, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134. 

2.  In summary at about 17.50 hours on the 1st September 2008 the police when conducting an anti-dangerous drugs operation at Island Resort Mall, Siu Sai Wan intercepted the defendant. Upon search the police found hidden in the defendant’s underpants five plastic bags containing the ketamine.  Under caution the defendant admitted that he and his friends had pooled their money together to buy the ketamine to be shared amongst them. 

3.  In June this year the Court of Appeal in the Secretary for Justice v HII Siew-cheng [2008] 3 HKC 325 laid down new guidelines for trafficking in ketamine.  Where the narcotic content is between 10 and 50 grammes sentence after trial falls within the range of 4-6 years imprisonment.   47.48 grammes of ketamine place this at the upper end of that range.

4.  The defendant is a young offender aged 20, 19 at the time of the offence.  Section 109A of the Criminal Procedure Ordinance, Chapter 221 provides no court shall sentence a person of or over 16 and under 21 years of age to imprisonment unless the court is of the opinion that no other method of dealing with such person is appropriate.  This provision however does not apply to an excepted offence.  Although trafficking in dangerous drugs is an excepted offence I nevertheless called for training centre suitability report on the defendant.

5.  The report reveals the defendant’s background including his joining a triad society and how he became involved in dangerous drugs.   After general assessment of the defendant’s behaviour and attitude while on remand he is considered suitable for detention in a training centre.

6.  In passing sentence I have carefully considered everything said on the defendant’s behalf by Mr Ng and Miss Wong together with the letter written by the defendant’s father.  I am asked to follow the recommendation in the report and sentence the defendant to detention in a training centre.

7.  The court’s have repeatedly said that save in very rare cases a training centre order should not be imposed for trafficking in substantial quantities of dangerous drugs (see Secretary for Justice v KO Fei-tat [2002] 4 HKC 59). 

8.  Taking into account the defendant is a person of hitherto good character and is still young, although not of extreme youth, the reasons why he was trafficking in drugs on that day together with the special circumstances of the case I am satisfied this is one of those very rare cases.  The defendant is sentenced to detention in a training centre.