CHAN TAK FUN v. THE QUEEN
HTML content
CACC001012/1980
| IN THE SUPREME COURT | |
| Criminal Appeal | |
| 1980, No. 1012 |
| BETWEEN | ||
| CHAN TAK FUN | Appellant | |
| and | ||
| THE QUEEN | Respondent |
Coram: Barker, J.
Date of Judgment: 19th December, 1980.
-----------------
JUDGMENT
-----------------
1. In this case the appellant Chan Tak-fun appeals against a sentence of 18 months' imprisonment imposed upon him at the Fanling Magistrate's Court on the 29th September 1980 for aiding and abetting the remaining in the Colony of an illegal immigrant.
2. What happened was that the illegal immigrant came to the appellant's hut, asked for accommodation and asked that the appellant should phone his relative. The appellant thereupon led the illegal immigrant to a place where he could hide in the wood, gave him food and got in touch with the illegal immigrant's relative who refused to come to see the illegal immigrant but asked the appellant to take the immigrant to him. The appellant gave the illegal immigrant clothes and on the way to meet his relative he and the immigrant were arrested. In these circumstances the learned magistrate sentenced the appellant to 18 months' imprisonment expressing the view that he was satisfied that this was one of the most serious cases of aiding and abetting. I cannot agree. The appellant, a man of 48 years of age married with three young children and working with a reasonable salary had a completely clear record and he pleaded guilty. What was done was not done by any kind of pre-arrangement nor was there any question of any financial reward. There was moreover only one illegal immigrant involved. Cases of this nature, except in very rare instances, warrant an immediate custodial sentence and it has been said more than once in the courts that twelve months' imprisonment should be the ordinary sentence for such cases. In my judgment this case is somewhat less serious than the ordinary case and I am of the view that the proper sentence is one of 9 months' imprisonment. The appeal is accordingly allowed to that extent.
Representation:
Frederick Lee (Howell & Co.) for appellant
Freeman for Crown/Respondent