HKSAR v. ZEHESAN, MAHMUD
- Citation
- HKSAR v. ZEHESAN, MAHMUD
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Hong Kong
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Decision
- 19 September 2007
- Posture
- Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Judgment on Appeal in High Court Court of First Instance (appellate Jurisdiction)
- Case number
- HCMA475/2007
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Court of First Instance
- Decision
- 19 September 2007
- Posture
- Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Judgment on Appeal in High Court Court of First Instance (appellate Jurisdiction)
- Case number
- HCMA475/2007
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish exceptional humanitarian circumstances warranting a reduction of sentence: supporting foreign documents were unreliable given their construction and appellant's previous conviction for possession of a false instrument, there was no independent proof of imminent harm to the children, and no urgency for return to Bangladesh; therefore the magistrate's total sentence was appropriate.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
02
Material facts
Parties
HKSAR
Respondent Counsel: Ms Grace Chan, SGC, Department of JusticeZehesan, Mahmud
Appellant Counsel: Mr Jonathan Acton-Bond, instructed by Messrs Tang Tso & Lau, assigned by the Director of Legal AidAmounts and remedies
- Sentence First Offence Months: 12
- Sentence Second Offence Months: 15
- Total Effective Sentence Months: 18
03
Procedural history
Posture
Magistracy Appeal (criminal) / Judgment on Appeal in High Court Court of First Instance (appellate Jurisdiction)
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether appellant breached a deportation order contrary to s43(1)(a) of the Immigration Ordinance
- 02
Whether appellant unlawfully remained in Hong Kong contrary to s38(1)(b) of the Immigration Ordinance
- 03
Whether there are exceptional humanitarian circumstances warranting reduction of sentence
- 04
Evidentiary weight and reliability of foreign documents in mitigation
- 05
Appropriate totality and concurrency of sentences
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Appellant sought reduction of sentence on humanitarian grounds: wife recently died of cancer in Bangladesh and three children (aged 14, 12, 10) are being cared for by appellant's brother and sister-in-law; produced medical documents and a telegram in support.
- Respondent
- Prosecution submitted documents are unreliable, there is no independent proof of children or that their welfare is imperilled, no urgency for appellant's return to Bangladesh, sentences were appropriate and mitigation did not justify reduction.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115 s43(1)(a)
Breach of a deportation order constitutes a criminal offence under the Immigration Ordinance and can warrant a custodial sentence.
- 02
Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115 s38(1)(b)
Unlawful remaining in the territory is an offence under the Immigration Ordinance.
- 03
Judgment (High Court)
Humanitarian or family circumstances may justify mitigation only if they are exceptional and compelling.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to establish exceptional humanitarian circumstances warranting a reduction of sentence: supporting foreign documents were unreliable given their construction and appellant's previous conviction for possession of a false instrument, there was no independent proof of imminent harm to the children, and no urgency for return to Bangladesh; therefore the magistrate's total sentence was appropriate.
Obiter and limits
- Comment that breaching a deportation order could be regarded as the primary offence and need not attract a lesser sentence than unlawful remaining.
- Courts view foreign medical and political documents with skepticism where construction or contents contain oddities.
- Previous conviction for possession of a false instrument justifies added scrutiny of documentary evidence.
Court disposition
Appeal dismissed.
- Appeal dismissed.
Source and reliance status
Court of First Instance · 19 September 2007
This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.
Judgment reading view
Judgment text
The complete available source text.
Court of First Instance
Judgment· 19 September 2007
bjbj HCMA475/2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE
HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION
COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE (Appellate Jurisdiction) MAGISTRACY APPEAL NO. 475 OF 2007 (ON APPEAL FROM KCCC 780 OF 2007) ---------------------
BETWEEN HKSAR Respondent and ZEHESAN, MAHMUD Appellant ---------------------- Before : Hon McMahon J in Court Date of Hearing : 19 September 2007 Date of Judgment : 19 September 2007 -------------------------
J U D G M E N T -------------------------
AUTONUMOUT The appellant, a 47-year-old Bangladeshi male, was convicted at Kowloon City Magistracy on his own pleas of an offence of breaching a deportation order, contrary to section 43(1)(a) of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115 ( the Ordinance ) and of an offence of unlawfully remaining in Hong Kong, contrary to section 38(1)(b) of the Ordinance.
AUTONUMOUT He was sentenced to 12 months imprisonment in respect of the 1st charged offence and to 15 months imprisonment in respect of the 2nd charged offence. Three months of those sentences were to run concurrently. That resulted in a total sentence of 18 months imprisonment.
AUTONUMOUT The facts of the case, simply expressed, were that a woman police constable came across the appellant while she was performing her duties in Chung King Mansion in Kowloon. She asked him to produce proof of his identity and he was unable to do so. The appellant was arrested and after investigation it was learnt he had been made the subject of a deportation order on 5 September 2006 and had therefore returned to Hong Kong in breach of that order. Those facts grounded the 1st charged offence. His return to Hong Kong was an unlawful landing and he remained in Hong Kong without the authority of the Director of Immigration. That was the basis of the 2nd charged offence.
AUTONUMOUT The appellant has a poor record in Hong Kong. He has previous convictions for trafficking in dangerous drugs, possession of a part I poison, possession of a false instrument and breach of a condition of stay.
AUTONUMOUT Acton-Bond who represents the appellant today does not dispute that the sentences imposed by the magistrate were appropriate in their totality. He does not seek therefore to challenge the sentences imposed in principle though in passing I must say I can see no good reason why the sentence imposed in respect of the offence of breaching a deportation order should be less than that for unlawfully remaining in Hong Kong. The former offence, to my mind, could well be considered as the primary offence.
AUTONUMOUT Acton-Bond seeks a reduction of sentence on behalf of the appellant simply on the basis of humanitarian grounds. The ground he relies upon quite simply as it now stands is that the appellant s wife has recently died of cancer in Bangladesh and their three children, aged 14, 12 and 10 years, are being looked after by the appellant s brother and the brother s wife.
AUTONUMOUT In support of his application the appellant has provided the court with various documents apparently issued by medical institutions, doctors and local politicians in Bangladesh. Those documents purport to trace aspects of the appellant s wife s medical history prior to her death.
AUTONUMOUT Such documents are unfortunately, as the result of experience, looked at with some skepticism by these courts and in many cases, as with those provided to me, there are oddities in the documents construction or contents which enhances those suspicions. It must be said also that the appellant s previous conviction for possession of a false instrument causes me added concern.
AUTONUMOUT That instrument, I am told, was a false document purporting to be signed on behalf of or by the Director of Immigration allowing the appellant an extension of his stay in Hong Kong. That being so I have some unease so far as this previous offences implications are concerned regarding the documents placed before me today.
AUTONUMOUT On balance, taking all these matters into account, I cannot say the documents provided to me fill me with any great confidence.
AUTONUMOUT In any event however in the present case, regardless of the truth or veracity of the documents provided by the appellant, the factual situation relied upon by him is quite clear and, in my view, does not give rise to such exceptional humanitarian considerations so as to trigger a reduction in the appellant s sentence.
AUTONUMOUT He says his wife has recently died. He provides me with a telegram to that effect from a person he says is his brother. If true it is most unfortunate that his wife has died. But as Mr Aton-Bond concedes the opportunity for the appellant to be with his wife before her death has now passed. That leaves, in my view, as the sole remaining humanitarian consideration the well being of the appellant s children.
AUTONUMOUT Chan for the respondent points out to me that there is no independent documentary proof that the appellant has any children. But accepting the appellant s contentions in that regard, his three children are presently being looked after by his brother and his brother s wife. Nothing material has been provided to me to suggest that their well being is imperilled. The appellant will be released from prison, assuming the usual discount, in little more than four months. There is accordingly no urgency in his return to Bangladesh.
AUTONUMOUT Sad though it may be that the appellant s wife has died, if that be so, I am unable to say that the appellant s present circumstances or those of his children are so exceptional as to warrant any reduction in the appellant s sentence as an act of clemency.
AUTONUMOUT The appeal is dismissed. (M.A. McMahon) Judge of the Court of First Instance High Court Ms Grace Chan, SGC of the Department of Justice, for HKSAR Mr Jonathan Acton-Bond, instructed by Messrs Tang Tso & Lau, assigned by the Director of Legal Aid, for the Appellant
PAGE -
PAGE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H I J 1udk 1udk &`#$ KF^XZ KF^X & 6" ABC.dot setup Microsoft Word 9.0 Judiciary Title Microsoft Word Document MSWordDoc Word.Document.8
Case-aware research
Ask AI about this case
The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.