HKSAR v. Lam Kwok Sang

DCCC 805/2013

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

CRIMINAL CASE NO. 805 OF 2013

____________

________________________

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

________________________

The defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of "Trafficking in a dangerous drug". The dangerous drug involved is ketamine.

Summary of Facts

2.About 4:00 p.m. on 18 June 2013, police officers spotted a black bag ("the Bag") on the ventilation window sill of Room 14080, 14/F, Lotus Tower 3, Sau Mau Ping ("the Flat").  They opened it and found inside about 10 transparent resealable plastic bags containing suspected dangerous drugs.  They placed the Bag in its original position and laid ambush nearby.

3.About 4:45 a.m. on 19 June, the defendant was seen approaching the Flat.  He picked up the Bag and opened it.  He was then intercepted for investigation.  Upon search, the Bag was found to contain 9 transparent plastic bags (collectively "E1"; which later found to contain a total of 120 grammes of a powder containing 50 grammes of ketamine).  Under caution, the defendant said "I owed Ah Hung $3,000 therefore I helped him traffic the ketamine, please don't arrest me."

4.In his video recorded interview, the defendant admitted that he met Ah Hung about 2 months ago.  Ah Hung asked him to go to the window sill outside the Flat to get the Bag with ketamine inside. Ah Hung told him to wait for calls and delivery instructions.  Ah Hung also promised to pay him $3,000 as remuneration.

Mitigation & Sentence

5.The defendant is now 22 and has a clear record.  Defence lawyer Ms. LAM informed me that the defendant was unemployed since March this year.  He previously worked as a painter earning $500 per day.  His mother and brother are in court today.  His father (aged 70) suffers from various elderly health problems.

6.Ms. LAM submitted that the defendant has been cooperative with the Police throughout.  He makes no attempt to get a shorter sentence by asserting "partial self-consumption".  Ms. LAM stressed the defendant's clear record and guilty plea; she asked the court for mercy by adopting a lower starting point.

7.A clear message must be conveyed to the general public that "drug trafficking" is a serious crime and that drug traffickers would most certainly be punished by long-term imprisonment even for fresh offenders.

The Court of Appeal has laid down clear sentencing guidelines for trafficking in ketamine (see SJ v HII Siew Cheng [2009] 1 HKLRD 1). For 10 to 50 grammes, the sentence ranges from 4 to 6 years' imprisonment.

8.In the present case, the defendant trafficked in 50 grammes of ketamine.  The appropriate starting point is 6 years' imprisonment.  A one-third discount is given for the guilty plea, reducing the sentence to 4 years.  Apart from this, I see no other mitigating factors which warrant any further discount.  The sentence I pass is 4 years' imprisonment.

9.It is sad to send a 22-year-old young man with a clear record to prison for 4 years.  It is certainly not an easy task.  I understand that sentencing tariffs are not meant to be straight jacket, but I simply cannot find any reason to depart from the guidelines in the present case.  I cannot stress enough the seriousness of "drug trafficking".  All sensible jurisdictions (not just Hong Kong but many other places around the world) are determined to combat against it by way of heavy punishment.  The purpose of doing so is abundantly clear – to deter all offenders (both fresh and repeated).  If there are no more willing "foot soldiers" like the defendant, the drug business of the "generals" behind the scene will not flourish.