IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO.259 OF 2002
(ON APPEAL FROM WSCC 328 OF 2002)
Coram: Deputy High Court Judge McMahon in Court
Date of Hearing: 8 May 2002
Date of Judgment: 8 May 2002
J U D G M E N T
1. The appellant appeals against sentence only. He was convicted of possession of an identity card relating to another person contraryto section 7A(1A) of the Registration of Persons Ordinance, Cap.177, Laws of Hong Kong. He was convicted of another offence of using that identity card contrary to the same section. And hewas further convicted of breach of a condition of stay by overstaying in Hong Kong contrary to section 41 of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap.115.
2. In respect of the identity card offences he was sentenced to 12 months’ imprisonment on each. In respect of the immigration offence,he was sentenced to two months’ imprisonment. All sentences were to be served concurrently. He therefore received a total of 12 months’imprisonment.
3. He does not complain about the severity of the sentences nor does he say that they are wrong in principle. He says a humanitarianmatter has arisen since his sentencing which he relies upon to seek a further reduction so far as those sentences are concerned.That humanitarian aspect is that his daughter, who lives in Hong Kong, received a phone call from his home country Pakistan wherehis wife and two other children live. According to that phone call, received by his Hong Kong resident daughter and passed on tohim by her, his wife was ill and his children were starving. He said upon receiving that information that he then, on 27 February,some two months ago, launched this appeal. He wants early release and throws himself effectively on the mercy of the court so thathe can return to Pakistan and assist his wife and children. I must say I find the appellant’s version of these events unconvincing.I appreciate life in Pakistan at the present time for some may be very difficult, but the appellant’s family and his wife’s familyare there. He also has another daughter married and apparently living successfully in Hong Kong. There was no reason given to mewhy he is in a better position to assist his wife and children if they are in difficulties in Pakistan, than other members of hisfamily or his wife’s family.
4. In any event I do not accept the appellant’s version of events. It seems improbable that he would have waited over the period oftime since he filed his grounds of appeal till now before having done something in terms of organising some assistance to his familyif in fact their condition was as he says he believes it to be. He has produced nothing to me in terms of any documentation, anyletters, or anything else to support the difficulties that he says he believes his wife and children are in Pakistan.
5. Accordingly, I find the humanitarian basis of the appellant’s appeal has not been established and the appeal is dismissed.
Mr Chiu Wai Tin, GC, of the Department of Justice, for the Respondent/HKSAR
Appellant in person