COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs before a magistrate. She is now committed for sentence.
In the evening of 13 October 2023, the defendant arrived Hong Kong by flight from Windhoek, Namibia via Addis Ababa, Ethiopia and Dubai, Qatar. She was stopped by the customs in Hong Kong and upon examination, suspected dangerous drugs were found concealed inside compartments in the handbag the defendant was carrying.
The suspected drugs were later found to be a total of 1.98 kilogrammes of a solid containing 1.696 kilogrammes of cocaine. According to the defendant, she was given the handbag at Addis Ababa and at that point of time, she realised that there were dangerous drugs concealed inside.
The defendant is a Namibian national. She is now 57 years old, educated up to Grade 10 in Namibia and attended secretary course for six months there. She is divorced and have(has?)four grown-up children and she previously worked as a managing director in a hotel and a sales manager but had been unemployed two months prior to the commitment of the present offence.
The defendant was introduced to a contact person known as Freddy by her former colleague in Namibia and it was the person named Freddy that induced the defendant to commit the present offence.
In mitigation, Mr Arthur, counsel for the defendant, submitted that the defendant was then in a vulnerable situation because of his(her?) financial pressure and she was then induced by Freddy to commit the present offence. The defendant has a clear record in Hong Kong.
In considering the sentence of an offence of trafficking in dangerous drugs, this court is to adopt the six-step approach set out in the case of HKSAR v Herry Jane Yusuph and to apply the guideline laid down in the Court of Appeal case of HKSAR v Huang Ruifang.
The quantity involved in the present case is 1.696 kilogrammes of cocaine. In accordance with the guideline set out under Huang Ruifang, the appropriate starting points should be within the range of 20 to 24 years’ imprisonment. I accept the submission of Mr Arthur that the role of the defendant in the present case, albeit that there is international element involved, was a mere courier, and I can see no other aggravating factors as well as mitigating factors in this case.
In the circumstances, I will adopt a starting point of 20 years’ imprisonment for the present offence and with the defendant’s guilty plea, the sentence is reduced to 13 years and 4 months.