R. v. DOLLY A. QUIAMAS

No. 445 of 1995
(Criminal)

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL

____________

________________

J U D G M E N T

________________

Gall, J. (giving the judgment of the Court)

1. The applicant was convicted by Judge Lugar-Mawson in the District Court on 14th June 1995 on one charge of conspiracy to forge in that she, together with others, between 1st May 1994 and 24th October 1994 conspired together and with persons unknown to make forged Hong Kong identity cards, immigration stamp impressions, immigration employment visa stamps and employment contracts, with the intention that they or another shall use them to induce someone to accept them as genuine, and by reason of so accepting them to do or not to do some act to his own or any other person's prejudice.

2. The facts accepted and found to be true by the learned trial judge were that the applicant agreed with another defendant to bring Filipinos to Hong Kong on tourist visas to work here. She procured those workers to enter into vcontracts which were not genuine contracts. She was aware that their passports were taken from them in Hong Kong, chopped and returned to them later with false stamps entered in them as to their exit from the Philippines and as to their entry into Hong Kong and the other necessary stamps for employment. She was aware that identity cards were given to them. The learned judge refused to accept the defence of the Applicant but in doing so, did not infer her guilt.

3. The Applicant has put before us very little in the way of grounds of appeal against sentences. In essence, her grounds of appeal are that she would not have acted in the way she was said to have acted in respect of the 3rd accused nor would she have acted as was alleged against her countryman. This in essence is the defence which she raised at trial. It was fully canvassed by the trial judge, fully examined and was found by him to have no merit.

4. In these circumstances, there was no basis upon which this Court can give leave to appeal against conviction and the application for leave to appeal against conviction is refused.

5. In respect of the application for leave to appeal against sentence, the Applicant raises only one new matter and that she has repaid the money paid to her to those from whom she took it. In this case she involved others in the use of false documents, she conspired to forge contracts, to have false entries made in passports and in the creation of false identity cards. As was said in the case of Attorney General v. Wong Ho Kay, Cri App. No. 232 of 1995 by Mortimer J.A. "The offence strikes at the root of the local system whereby domestic helpers were allowed into the Territory provided they have valid and approved contracts". What this Applicant has done strikes at the heart of the system and the sentence of 3 years' imprisonment was amply justified on the facts and was neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle. The application for leave to appeal against the sentence is refused.