COURT: The defendant pleaded guilty to a count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. He was charged on the 31st day of December 2024, at the Hong Kong International Airport, unlawfully trafficked in a dangerous drug, namely 2,445 grammes of a liquid containing 1,288 grammes of cocaine and 607 grammes of a suspension containing 353 grammes of cocaine. The total quantity of cocaine is one of 1,641 grammes.
Facts which defendant admitted are as follows. In the afternoon on 31 December 2024, defendant arrived at Hong Kong through the Hong Kong International Airport. At around 3 pm, defendant was walking through the Green Channel and was intercepted for customs clearance.
During the luggage examination, upon enquiries of a Customs officer, defendant confirmed the black suitcase belonged to him. However, when the Customs officer requested defendant to open the suitcase, he failed to open the suitcase after several attempts. The Customs officer told defendant that he would break and open the luggage, to which the defendant agreed.
After the suitcase was prised opened, two bottles of purported wine, a plastic bottle of purported shampoo, a plastic bottle of purported body lotion, and a glass spray bottle were found. All of them were wrapped with clothes.
The Customs officer opened the bottle of shampoo and found a piece of tin foil therein. The bottle contained some murky liquid, and the rapid test indicated that the liquid contained cocaine. Defendant was arrested for trafficking in a dangerous drug and cautioned in English.
The Customs officer then examined the contents of the bottle of body lotion, the wine, and the spray bottle and found therein suspected cocaine.
After examining the spray bottle, which was the last one that was examined, the officer asked defendant if he knew what was inside the bottles. Defendant replied “same substance”. The Customs officer pointed at the bottles and asked defendant whether they were of “all same substance”, to which defendant replied “Yes”.
It subsequently transpired that the narcotics found in the five bottles were a total of 2,445 grammes of a liquid containing 1,288 grammes of cocaine and 607 grammes of a suspension containing 353 grammes of cocaine.
Defendant had on him US$283 and a mobile phone with two SIM cards.
Defendant’s mobile phone was examined and the following WhatsApp chat records were found:
(1) There were discussions between defendant and a person known as Wallace. On 4 December 2024, Wallace told the defendant that there would be a job to Hong Kong and the job would be paid in dollars. It appears that the reward was $4,000. It is presumed that $4,000 is US dollars.
(2) Defendant told his mother that he would be going a trip for Wallace. He had bought a suitcase himself and he had checked the suitcase thoroughly.
(3) On 29 December 2024, Wallace instructed defendant to go to his place by Uber, bringing along the suitcase with clothes so that they could organise the suitcase.
(4) Wallace purchased insurance for defendant.
In December 2024, the average retail price of cocaine was $740 per gramme. The drug seized could have been sold at street level for $1,214,340.
Defendant now admits that at the material time, he unlawfully trafficked the subject cocaine by importing the cocaine into Hong Kong.
The defendant is a Brazilian male. He was born on 3 October 1998. He is now 27 but was 26 at the time of committing the offence. He has a clear record in Hong Kong and it was urged upon me that in fact he had a clear record worldwide, and I am prepared to accept it. Defendant claimed that he had attained education up to university level and he used to work as a delivery man.
The total quantity of cocaine in this case is 1,641 grammes. For 1,500 grammes to 5,000 grammes of cocaine, one is looking at the sentence range from 20 years to 24 years.
I accept that you are a courier bringing drugs into Hong Kong for a reward. In Lee Ming Ho, reported in [2024] 1 HKLRD 1186, the Court of Appeal had said that importing drugs into Hong Kong is to be considered in gauging the role and culpability of the defendant. Therefore, I accept you as a courier but in assessing your role and culpability, I have to take into account this international element.
In Raman Kapusamy, reported in [2024] 2 HKLRD 955, the Court of Appeal had this to say, paragraph 58 and 59:
“Sentencing judges should remember, in relation to the international element, that the greater the quantity, the more harm is caused by that quantity entering Hong Kong and being disseminated on our streets.
As we said in Lee Ming Ho, the international element is to be considered as part of the assessment of the offender’s role and culpability:
In exercising their discretion, courts will still bear in mind the quantity of narcotic being introduced into Hong Kong, which not only increases the supply of the particular dangerous drug, but causes greater harm to the community.”
The Court of Appeal also said the international element is itself capable of taking a number of different forms and may not therefore lend itself to standard or uniform enhancement. As the Court of Appeal said, because in the context of drug trafficking, the international element may be reflected differently in the roles and culpability of individual defendants.
Taking into consideration the quantity of drugs and your role as a courier by importing drugs into Hong Kong, I fix the notional starting point at 21 years.
Although you have a clear record, you are young, I don’t think there is any discount that I can give for those for such a serious crime. The only mitigating factor which I found in your case is your early plea, for which I will give you a one-third discount.
Therefore, I sentence you to a term of imprisonment of 14 years. Thank you.
