HKSAR v. LIU QIANQING HCMA 103/2007

S’s words:-

This is a classical case of bogus marriage that the Defendant appealed against sentence (after the guilty plea).

The Defendant was sent to prison for 21 months of which 12 months in relation to making false representation whilst 9 months for conspiracy to defraud.

9 months for conspiracy to defraud is not excessive at all.

12 months for making false representation is also reasonable.

Attention has to be paid to the fact that the Court is entitled to impose consecutive sentence (but not concurrent) for making false representations and conspiracy to defraud.

Thus, before she pleaded guilty in the lower Court below, is it possible for the Defendant’s counsel asking for a plea bargain? Unfortunately, I do not want to speculate further on this point.

Not only Shatin’s Principal Magistrate is well aware of bogus marriage. Most of the magistrates in Shatin are well familiar with the same as well.

To conclude, don’t ever try to enter into any bogus marriage, or otherwise, one would fact the risks of entering into the jail at last.

--- quote from judgment ---

Date of Judgment: 16 August 2007

The Appellant was originally 1 of 2 defendants who appeared before the Principal Magistrate in Shatin Court. The Appellant was charged with 6 counts of making a false representation to an Immigration Officer under Part II of the Immigration Ordinance, Cap. 115 and a joint charge of conspiracy to defraud which is the 7^th charge.

The other defendant in the case is the person with whom she entered into a bogus marriage. The Appellant pleaded guilty and after mitigation she was sentenced to a total term of 21 months imprisonment. She appeals against that sentence.

First of all, I do not agree that is not a serious offence. It is extremely serious because, not only had the Appellant come to Hong Kong previously on the strength of a bogus marriage, she had been in and out of Hong Kong for a total of 6 times. Whether she intended to settle in Hong Kong eventually is not the point. The point is that she would be able to eventually have that option. The bogus marriage was a fraud perpetrated on the government of Hong Kong. It is extremely serious and as the learned Magistrate had noted its prevalence in Hong Kong. The courts have tried to deter this kind of offence with strict sentences so as to deter others from acting in this way.

These cases are hard to detect and the offender should be punished accordingly. I do not consider the sentence to be manifestly excessive or indeed excessive at all. The learned Magistrate had imposed correct sentences and so I consider that the sentences are not wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive and so the appeal is dismissed.