HKSAR v. Lo Chun Hei and Another

HCCC 9/2025

[2025] HKCFI 5540

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 9 OF 2025

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

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

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

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

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

COURT: Both defendants have pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug, contrary to section 4 of the Dangerous Drugs Ordinance and are committed to this court for sentence.

On 6 December 2022, customs officer opened one parcel in the Super Terminal One of the Hong Kong International Airport for examination. He found 852 grammes of ketamine inside that parcel. A controlled delivery operation was mounted.

On 13 December 2022, D1 attempted to pick up the cargo from the pickup point which was situated at a unit on the 7th floor of Mai Kei Industrial Building, Tuen Mun. After paying for the delivery charge, D1 took over the parcel and left the pickup point. He was then intercepted by customs officers outside.

Subsequent investigation revealed that it was D2 who instructed D1 to collect the parcel. D1 was promised a financial reward had he succeeded in collecting the parcel. Both D1 and D2 admitted that they unlawfully trafficked in the ketamine in question.

The value of the ketamine, the street value of the ketamine was estimated to be over HK$574,000.

D1 is now 23, educated up to Secondary school level. He has a clear record. Prior to his arrest, he was a student. D2 is now 21 and has one criminal record, not similar to the present charge. Prior to his arrest, he was unemployed.

Starting point for trafficking in 852 grammes of ketamine that is on quantity alone would be 13 years and 3 months’ imprisonment.

Mitigation letters from family members, friends, school teacher and relatives have been produced to this court, pleading for leniency on behalf of both defendants. I fully understand their wishes, however my hands are tied by the guidelines set down by the Court of Appeal.

Without further evidence pointing to otherwise, D1 would be treated as a courier collecting drugs on behalf of D2.

Apart from his plea, there is no other mitigating factor. D1 is entitled to the full one-third discount. As such, for the offence D1 stands convicted, he is sentenced to 8 years and 10 months’ imprisonment.

D2 is the mastermind/organiser behind this operation. He played a more sophisticated and significant role in this collection of drugs. He recruited a courier and organised the collection for the ketamine in question. He was one level above D1. The starting point for his role is thus enhanced to one of 14 years’ imprisonment.

After a full one-third discount, for the offence D2 stands convicted, he is therefore sentenced to 9 years and 4 months’ imprisonment.