HKSAR v. NG WAI CHIU

HCMA1154/2000

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 1154 OF 2000

(ON APPEAL FROM NKCC 6605 OF 2000)

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

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1. This is an appeal against sentence. The appellant was convicted on his own plea at North Kowloon Magistracy of an offence of possession of a forged identity card, contrary to section 7A(1) of the Registration of Persons Ordinance, Cap.177. In respect of that offence, he was sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment. He appeals on the ground the sentence was too severe.

2. The facts of the offence are quite straightforward. The appellant was stopped by a police patrol for the purposes of an identification check, and he produced to the officers a forged identity card, the subject of the charge. He subsequently admitted to the officers that he purchased the card in Shenzen before coming to Hong Kong.

3. Through his counsel before the learned magistrate, the appellant admitted that he intended to use the forged identity card to get employment in Hong Kong. At the time of his arrest, he had overstayed the period he was permitted to remain in Hong Kong by some seven weeks.

4. In his Reasons for Sentence, the learned magistrate referred to a number authorities of this court. He relied particularly upon the case of Chan Man Mo v. HKSAR, HCMA 1059 of 1999, where Madam Justice Bokhary helpfully set out much of the sentencing history and principles of this offence. In her judgment, she said :

"(2) Where the offender's presence in Hong Kong was illegal at the time of his offence, whether because he was an illegal immigrant or because he was an overstayer, a sentence of about 15 months' imprisonment upon a plea of guilty would be appropriate if he had a forged or somebody else's identity card for the purpose of obtaining employment or otherwise furthering his remaining in Hong Kong."

5. That particular statement of law, in my view, complies with the principle expressed in a large number of judgments of this court that where the possession of a forged or unlawfully possessed identification card is to further the ability of a person unlawfully present in Hong Kong to remain in Hong Kong, then an appropriate sentence after plea is 15 months' imprisonment.

6. The learned magistrate in the present case found from the agreed facts and what was put before him, that the appellant was an overstayer in Hong Kong and possessed a forged identification card for the purpose of obtaining employment in Hong Kong. He took into account the appellant's guilty plea, clear record and other matters advanced in mitigation. The magistrate's sentence after plea of 15 months' imprisonment was perfectly proper and cannot be criticized.

7. The appeal is dismissed.