HKSAR v. Rizania Noviyanti

HCCC 454/2017

[2018] HKCFI 2510

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 454 OF 2017

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

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

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording
of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT:

The defendant, Rizania Noviyanti, faced one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4(1)(a) and (3) of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance, Chapter 134. She pleaded not guilty and was found guilty by the jury after trial.

The facts of this case are fairly straightforward. The defendant was arrested on Nathan Road on 15 May 2017 at about 8 pm, carrying a plastic bag with 1.99 kilograms of a solid containing 1.617 kilograms of cocaine in it. The bag contained a milk carton and a cornflakes box. One bag of cocaine was found inside the milk carton, and three bags of cocaine were found inside the cornflakes box. The estimated retail value was $1.92 million.

She was stopped by a Customs officer who was on plainclothes duty because she attracted her attention when she walked past this officer and her partner quickly and was at the same time looking around. PW1 followed behind her and noticed a food box that was open in her bag and thought she would stop her to investigate the contents of her plastic bag.

The defendant’s case was that she had no knowledge of the drugs and was only running an errand for an African man called Edwin who had offered her part-time cleaning work. He asked her to pick up some food from his girlfriend in Hunghom because he was too busy working. She was on her way back to meet him in Jordan when she was intercepted.

The defendant is an Indonesian national who is now 32 years old. She originally had a domestic-helper contract in Hong Kong but it ended in 2013. Instead of leaving as required by the law, she remained here illegally working part-time. She was charged with overstaying, being in breach of her condition of stay, and pleaded guilty in the Magistrates’ Court. She was sentenced to 3 months’ imprisonment on 6 September 2017.

She has an 11-year-old son in Indonesia who is entrusted to the care of her parents. Her parents are farmers and rely on the defendant to send them money each month for living expenses and school fees of her child. At the time of her arrest, the defendant had a clear record in Hong Kong.

Mr McNamara, counsel for the defendant, has very frankly admitted that there is not much more he can say in mitigation and in the circumstances.

Trafficking in a dangerous drug is a serious offence. On conviction on indictment, a person is liable to a fine of $5 million and imprisonment for life. The total quantity involved here is 1,617 grammes of cocaine. In the authority of the Attorney General v Pedro Nel Rojas [1994] case, it was held that guidelines for sentences in the case of R v Lau Tak Ming [1990] are applicable to cases of trafficking in cocaine. The R v Lau Tak Ming authority only provided a tariff for cases involving narcotic content up to 600 grammes.

In HKSAR v Abdallah [2009], the Court of Appeal set out further guidelines for cases involving larger quantities. It was held that for cases involving narcotic content of between 1,200 and 4,000 grammes, an imprisonment term of 23 to 26 years should be considered after trial.

I have considered what I have heard during the case in relation to the defendant’s background. In all the circumstances and considering that there is 1,617 grammes of cocaine involved in this charge, according to the guidelines, a starting point of 23 years and 5 months will reflect the quantity as well as the nature and seriousness of the case.

There are no other factors in this case which would warrant any reduction in that starting point. So for the offence of trafficking in a dangerous drug, the defendant is sentenced to 23 years and 5 months.

Defendant, please stand up. So for the reasons I have just given, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment of 23 years and 5 months. Do you understand?

ACCUSED: Understood.