HKSAR v. LI QIONG FANG

HCMA 1035/2003

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 1035 OF 2003

(ON APPEAL FROM KCCC 14874/2003)

____________

____________

_______________

J U D G M E N T

_______________

1. This Appellant pleaded guilty in the Magistracy to one charge of Using a Forged Identity Card, contrary to section 7A(1) of the Registration of Persons Ordinance, Cap. 177 and another charge of Breach of Condition of Stay, contrary to section 41 and by virtue of Regulation 2(1)(a) of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115.

2. The facts showed that the Appellant, who was a visitor from the Mainland, applied for a job at a nursing home in Hong Kong in March 2003 and worked there. She produced a Hong Kong identity card to the person-in-charge. As a result of a raid conducted at the nursing home she was found by police. When asked to produce her Hong Kong identity card, she could not do so. Under caution, she told the police that she had paid HK$3,500 to a man in the Mainland for a forged Hong Kong Identity card and had subsequently lost it. She was the holder of a two-way permit who entered Hong Kong on 6 September 2003 as a visitor and had been permitted to stay until 5 October 2003.

3. The Magistrate sentenced her to 12 months' imprisonment on the first charge and 2 months' imprisonment on the second charge and ordered both sentences to run concurrently, although properly the second sentence should be consecutive. The Appellant had a previous conviction; on 16 September 2002, she was sentenced to 2 months' imprisonment suspended for 2 years, for a Breach of Condition of Stay.

4. The Appellant asked for a reduction in sentence and submitted that her husband is handicapped because of a recent traffic accident in China. She incurred hospital bills for him, which she was unable to meet. Her mother-in-law had high blood pressure and she had no money for her children's schooling. She was unable to pay her debts to the hospital, or to her neighbours. Her friend suggested this way of making money to her. She confirmed that she worked as a farmer in China and had two children under 18, although the Magistrate was told the children were 17 and 18.

5. The Magistrate noted the various sentencing guidelines for these offences and imposed entirely proper sentences. Apparently as an act of mercy he did not order the second sentence to be consecutive, but as a matter of principle he activated the suspended sentence of 2 months' imprisonment for the previous offence and ordered that it be consecutive to the 12 months' sentence, making a total of 14 months' imprisonment.

6. There is nothing excessive, or wrong in principle, with the Magistrate's sentences. Although one has sympathy with the Appellant's reasons for coming to Hong Kong, her story, sadly, is no different from many similar stories put before the courts. The matters submitted are not mitigation sufficient to reduce the sentences. This appeal is dismissed.