HKSAR v. KE YUQIONG

HCMA620/2006

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

(Appellate Jurisdiction)

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.620 OF 2006

(ON APPEAL FROM STCC 5299 OF 2006)

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

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

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

J U D G M E N T

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

1. This is an appeal by the appellant against the sentence of 15 months’ imprisonment, imposed upon her by Mr T.S. Jenkins at Shatin Magistracy for the offence of using a forged identity card, contrary to section 7(a) of the Registration of Persons Ordinance, Cap. 177; and 6 weeks’ imprisonment imposed on her for the offence of breaching the conditions of her stay, contrary to section 41 of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115, upon her pleas of guilty.  Both sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. She was unsuccessful in her attempt to persuade the magistrate to review the sentences.  She now appeals.  The ground of appeal in respect of both sentences is that they were too severe. 

3. The appellant admitted the brief facts of the case.  She had entered Hong Kong from the Mainland on 20 March this year.  She was permitted to remain here as a visitor for 90 days on condition that she did not take up employment. 

4. On 25 May she was found working in a noodle restaurant in Quarry Bay.  She had obtained this employment the previous day.  In doing so, she had used a forged Hong Kong Identity Card bearing her photograph.  She admitted that she had obtained the identity card on payment of $500.

5. Before this court the appellant referred to the hospitalisation of her elderly mother, which is a matter that had been raised before the magistrate.  She says that her mother is a Hong Kong resident and is in Eastern Hospital.  I would observe that the appellant is a Mainland resident and even if her sentence was reduced she would still have no permission to remain in Hong Kong.

6. The sentence of 15 months’ imprisonment for the offence of possession of a forced identity card was perfectly proper, bearing in mind that there was a link between the appellant’s status in Hong Kong and the forged identity card and that she had used it to work illegally.  See the cases of HKSAR v. Shamim Narwaz, HCMA804/1993 and HKSAR v. Lee Chang Li, HCMA935/2004.

7. The magistrate’s sentence of 6 weeks’ imprisonment to run concurrently on the charge of breach of condition of stay by taking up employment, also, in my view, cannot be criticised.

8. I dismiss the appellant’s appeal against sentence.