R. v. LEE KIN MING

---------

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

J U D G M E N T

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

Fuad, V.-P. (giving the judgment of the Court):

1. Lee Kin Ming, who is a young man aged 25, pleaded guilty in the District Court before Judge Burrell to 7 separate charges of arranging or assisting the passage to Hong Kong of unauthorised entrants contrary to section 37D(1)(a) of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115. This was on 30th October 1991. On 13th November 1991 he was sentenced to 2 1/2 years imprisonment on each of the charges, all the sentences to run concurrently.

2. The facts were that on 12th April 1991 the police laid an ambush on Tai Mong Tsai Road in Sai Kung. Soon after 1:00 p.m. they saw a group of 5 men and 2 women walking along man Yee Road. The applicant was talking to them and at one stage checked the road ahead before the party moved on. The police intercepted them and found that they all had identity cards which appeared to be forged. All the persons who were named in the charges admitted to the police at once that they were illegal immigrants from China. The applicant admitted his offences and told the police that he had received $1,000 per head for his part in arranging their entry into Hong Kong.

3. In passing sentence the learned judge, quite rightly, stated that these were serious offences but that he would reduce the sentence he would otherwise have imposed because of the immediate plea of guilty. He also accepted that the applicant had co-operated with the police and was remorseful.

4. Before us today, the applicant has told us of his family situation and has asked for a reduction so that he can look after his sick mother and his old father. His brothers and sisters, having married, had left home. He said that during the period of imprisonment he had already served he had realised his mistake and was very remorseful. He had lost everything. He assured us that if given the chance he would demonstrate that he would never break the law again.

5. Of course, we have sympathy for the applicant for the position in which he finds himself. Nevertheless, these were indeed serious offences and, although the applicant was a first offender, the sentences imposed were well within the accepted guidelines. His application for leave to appeal against his sentences is, therefore, refused.