HKSAR v. Mwinyimadi Shabani Salum

Case No.HCCC 495/2013
Court
High Court CFI
Date23 Jan 2014
Judge
Case Document
100%

HCCC 495/2013

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

CRIMINAL CASE NO 495 OF 2013

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

  HKSAR  
  v  
  MWINYIMADI Shabani Salum  
------------------
Before: Hon Tong J
Date: 23 January 2014 at 10.13 am
Present: Mr Peter Power, SADPP, of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR
  Mr James P Chandler, instructed by Knight & Ho, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the accused
Offence: Trafficking in a dangerous drug(販運危險藥物)

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

Transcript of the Audio Recording

of the Sentence in the above Case

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

COURT: This is a sentence of the court.

The defendant was charged with one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug. He pleaded guilty and admitted the facts.

What transpired was that the defendant arrived in the Hong Kong International Airport on the day in question. He was subjected to Customs clearance and during the search on his person, a package of dangerous drugs was found in his underpants.

Later in the hospital the defendant discharged 85 packets of drugs. The drugs involved were heroin in the form of morphine. The combined contents amounted to 930-odd grammes. The estimated retail value was about 1 million in Hong Kong.

Counsel for the defendant has mitigated on behalf of the defendant, saying that his role was limited as he was just a courier for financial gain, but he had not really received his reward. It was further said that the defendant was a simple fisherman in Tanzania with a family. He was in debt but he was not a drug user himself.

Counsel raised the point concerning the fact that the defendant could not speak nor understand Chinese or English so his imprisonment will be a more difficult experience for him. Counsel ask the court to adopt a starting point of 20 years to reflect this issue but it could be adjusted to 22 years because of the international elements.

While I agree with counsel for the overall 22 years’ starting point, I disagree with the reasoning. True that the defendant might not speak or understand the languages used in Hong Kong but he himself chose to deliver drugs to this place in which he is a stranger. So now he has to face the consequences.

In any case, I would not consider this issue a relevant factor in assessing the starting point.

I have considered the authorities of Lau Tak Ming and Abdallah. For this amount of drugs I believe 21½ years should be adopted but I shall add 6 months for the international elements, so the starting point is 22 years.

I shall give the defendant the full one-third discount for his guilty plea. Therefore, the sentence is 14 years and 8 months, but I see no reason to further reduce the sentence.