HKSAR v. DAGO, JOSEPHINE M.

HCMA 1093/2002

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 1093 OF 2002

(ON APPEAL FROM KCCC 16574 OF 2002)

_______________

________________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

1. The Appellant, who is 37 years of age, came to Hong Kong to work as a domestic helper. Her contract was prematurely terminated in February 1993. She applied for an extension of stay from the Immigration Department but the application was refused. She was required to leave Hong Kong on or before 24 March 1993. She did not leave. Eventually she surrendered to the Immigration Department in October this year and was arrested and charged with the present offence.

2. In his Reasons for Sentence, the Magistrate considered that the Appellant was a first offender, a widow. She also told the Magistrate that she did not return to the Philippines because she was worried that the finance company to which she owed HK$6,000.00 would get the debt collector to trouble her. She has a 75 years old father who has been hospitalized for kidney disease. So the Magistrate took into account the Appellant's family circumstances and at the same time, the Magistrate must have regard to legal principles and sentencing guidelines. He referred to two similar cases which were decided earlier this year. He came to the conclusion that the starting point of 15 months would be appropriate for the present offence because the Appellant had overstayed for a period of 9 years despite an express order from the Immigration Department to leave Hong Kong by not later than March 1993.

3. Although she may or might have family problems and financial difficulties, there is not a good excuse to break the law. In my view, the sentence imposed by the Magistrate is not excessive and is in accordance with sentencing guidelines. The 8 months' sentence is a lenient sentence and this court is constrained to reduce it further. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed.