COURT: The defendant has pleaded guilty to one count of trafficking in a dangerous drug in the lower court and she has come before me to be sentenced.
The offence involves trafficking in 1.01 kilogrammes of a mixture containing 0.54 of a kilogramme of heroin hydrochloride.
The defendant arrived at our Hong Kong International Airport on a flight from Kenya on 7 May 2013. She was subsequently found to have concealed objects inside her person and, on 10 May 2013, she discharged a total of 80 pellets which were found to contain the dangerous drug heroin which is the subject matter of the charge.
The estimated street value of the drug is in the region of HK$810,000.
The defendant was cautioned and, amongst other things, she admitted that she was carrying the drug to Hong Kong for a reward of $2,000. She was on her way to China to attend a wedding.
The defendant is single and aged 34 and is a citizen of Tanzania.
In mitigation, Mr Sherry said that the defendant is responsible financially for supporting her mother and younger sister and her brother. The defendant has always worked in the past and she has a clear record in Hong Kong and Tanzania.
It is clear that the defendant was nothing more than a courier who was to bring the drugs to Hong Kong. Mr Sherry said that she does not even know who would be the person who will collect it but she was told that she would be contacted when she arrived in Hong Kong.
Drug trafficking is a very serious offence in Hong Kong. The constant battle that the police and Customs wage against drug traffickers is constantly on the increase. In the High Court alone, the preponderance of our cases are to do with trafficking in dangerous drugs.
Guidelines have been laid down for trafficking in heroin in the case of Lau Tak Ming. This was a case in 1990 and the guideline laid down was that for trafficking in 400 to 600 grammes of heroin, a sentence of between 15 to 20 years’ imprisonment is warranted.
These heavy sentences were laid down in order to serve as a deterrent for people who were thinking of bringing the drugs into Hong Kong or trafficking with them in Hong Kong. But it is of no use because drug traffickers have actually moved their attention to a lot of African countries or South American countries where people may not be fully aware of the stringent guidelines we have of imprisonment for trafficking in dangerous drugs.
As I have said in the past, and I am going to repeat it here, that the only way is for the defendants themselves to write to the newspapers back in their countries warning their fellow citizens about the imprisonment that they will face when arrested in Hong Kong.
The amount which the defendant has brought into account is 540 grammes of heroin hydrochloride. It would merit a starting point of between 17 to 17½ years as pointed out by Mr Sherry. Taking into account all the circumstances, I will adopt a starting point of 17 years’ imprisonment in this case.
I will enhance that 17 years by 1 year for the international element in accordance with the Court of Appeal case submitted by Mr Sherry, which is Hong Kong SAR v Abdallah Anwar Abbas [2009] 2 HKLRD 370.
As for the appropriate discount, some matters have been raised in the chambers hearing this morning and, as I have indicated, those matters have not borne fruit. If, in the future, the matters submitted do bear some fruit, then the sentence may be revisited by the Court of Appeal.
As Mr Cheng has submitted, in the case of Hong Kong SAR v W [2013] 4, HKLRD at 369, Stock J in the Court of Appeal said that where the information provided leads nowhere, then the system opens itself to abuse if credit is given merely for the provision of information which bore no fruit.
In all the circumstances, I will give the defendant the full one-third discount which would be one of 6 years, and so I will sentence the defendant to 12 years’ imprisonment.