Secretary for Justice v. Hui Chi Fung

HCMP 830/2021

[2022] HKCFI 2957

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

MISCELLANEOUS PROCEEDINGS NO 830 OF 2021

_________________

_________________

_________________

__________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

__________________________

1.The Respondent was found guilty of criminal contempt in his absence after trial. Background of the case and determination of the

Court can be found in my earlier judgment dated 2 June 2022 which I shall not repeat.

2.In summary, the Respondent was found to deceive the police and the Court by providing false documents, namely invitation letters and itinerary from foreign political organization, in support of his application to lift travel restriction, as one of the conditions in granting him bail in the District Court, thus enabling the Respondent to leave the jurisdiction and evade criminal proceedings. 

3.The deception was carefully orchestrated by the Respondent with the consequences that public confidence in the administration of justice had been greatly undermined.  The Respondent’s actions not only made a mockery of the criminal justice system but also amounted to the commission of the offence of Perverting the Course of Public Justice. 

4.In terms of sentence, there are few direct authorities on this subject except one in the District Court^[1] where the defendant in that case provided a false Memorandum of Understanding, with the intention of inflating her financial soundness, in order for the Court to lift, similarly, a travel restriction.  By providing the false document, the defendant in that case misled her legal representatives as well as the Court and was subsequently charged for Perverting the Course of Public Justice and sentenced to 3 years and 6 months imprisonment after trial. 

5.Although the Respondent in the present case is not charged for Perverting the Course of Public Justice, the factual scenario is similar.  This Court has the power to commit a person found guilty of contempt to an indefinite term as well as a fixed term of imprisonment[2]. Having considered the seriousness of the present case, in particular the provision of false documents, the consequence of his abscondment and its effect on the criminal justice system and past authorities on sentence in relation to criminal contempt, I am of the view that the appropriate sentence in this case should, likewise be one of 3 years and 6 months imprisonment.  As the Respondent has showed no remorse, for the criminal contempt the Respondent has been found to be liable, he is sentenced to 3 years and 6 months imprisonment. 

6.Costs of the present proceedings be to the Applicant, on an indemnity basis, to be taxed if not agreed. 

Mr Anthony Chan and Ms Leona Cheung, Principal Government Counsel (Ag.), instructed by the Department of Justice, for the Applicant

The Respondent was not represented and did not appear

[1] HKSAR v Annells [2016] 1 HKLRD 780

[2] Order 52/1/6 of the Hong Kong Civil Procedure 2022