Public Prosecutor v Yang Qiuyu

• Jurisdiction: Singapore
• Judge: Ng Peng Hong
• Judgment Date: 09 February 2010
• Neutral Citation: [2010] SGDC 51
• Court: District Court (Singapore)
• Published date: 09 March 2010
• Citation: [2010] SGDC 51
• Plaintiff Counsel: Insp Allaudeen
• Defendant Counsel: Accused in person
• Year: 2010

9 February 2010

District Judge Ng Peng Hong

1 The accused pleaded guilty before the Community Court and was convicted on the following 2 charges:

MAC 41/2010

You,
YANG QIUYU, FEMALE / 34 YEARS
FIN NO: G9048530Q
CHINESE NATIONAL

are charged that you, on the 20^th day of December 2009 at or about 6.00pm, at the 510 Toa Payoh Lorong 6, Toa Payoh MRT station, did have in your possession, to wit, 204 digital video discs containing 179 films, without a valid certificate approving the exhibition of the said films, and you have thereby committed an offence under Section 21(1)(a) punishable under Section 22(1)(i) of the Films Act.

MAC 42/2010

You,
YANG QIUYU, FEMALE / 34 YEARS
FIN NO: G9048530Q
CHINESE NATIONAL

are charged that you, on the 20^th day of December 2009 at or about 6.00pm, at the 510 Toa Payoh Lorong 6, Toa Payoh MRT station, did have in your possession, to wit, 96 digital video discs containing 96 films which were obscene, and you have thereby committed an offence under Section 30(1) of the Films Act.

She was sentenced to a total fine of $37,900 in default 7 months’ imprisonment. The accused is appealing against the said sentence. She is serving her default sentence as the fines imposed on her were not paid.

Statement of Facts

2 The accused admitted to the Statement of Facts adduced in support of the charge without any qualification. The relevant Statement of Facts is as follows.

Facts incorporating 2 charges

“3 On 20^th Dec 2009 at about 6.00pm, the complainant was patrolling at 510 Toa Payoh Lorong 6, Toa Payoh MRT Station. He spotted the accused was carrying a big black coloured haversack. Complainant proceeded to check on the accused and found that there were 275 jackets of Digital Video discs (DVDs) inside the black coloured haversack. The accused was arrested for possession of obscene and uncertificated DVDs.

4 The seized DVDs were sent to the Board of Film Sensors (sic) for examination. The DVDs were examined by Ahmad Kasbari of Board of Film Sensors (sic) and he confirmed that 204 DVDs contained 179 films were without a valid ceritificate approving the exhibition of the said films and 96 DVDs containing 96 films were obscene.”

Antecedents

5 The accused has series of previous convictions. On 7 May 2009, she was sentenced to (a) 16 weeks’ imprisonment for an offence of under s15(3)(b) Immigration Act (remaining in Singapore unlawfully for more than 90 days), (b) fine of $35,000 in default 2 months’ imprisonment for an offence under s136 (2)(a) Copyright Act (selling pirated articles), (c) 3 months’ imprisonment for an offence under s6(1)(a) Films Act (carrying on business of importing, making, distributing or exhibiting films without licence) and (d) 6 months for an offence under s29(3)(a) Films Act (distributing or has in his possession for the purposes of distributing obscene films). At the same time, one charge under s21 (1) (a) Films Act (possession of uncensored films without licence) and 2 charges under s136 (2)(a) Copyright Act were taken into account for the purposes of sentencing.

Mitigation

6 In mitigation, the accused pleaded for leniency. She alleged that she has to take care of her young son and mother in law. She indicated that she would like to go back to China as soon as possible.

Sentencing Considerations

7 In my view, the primary considerations for sentencing in this case were retribution and deterrence. It was to reflect our society’s abhorrence of the offences committed and discourage the offender and others from such acts and to protect public morality.

8 In Sentencing Practice in the Subordinate Courts (2^nd Edition) at pg 628, the commentary on the type and quantum of sentence for such offences states that it would depend on the circumstances, and in particular on the quality and nature of the films and the quantity thereof, and, secondly, whether there is any element of commercial gain. A non-custodial sentence is reserved for isolated offences where the number of films are small (usually less than 20), and it is for personal use, where there is no commercial element and the accused has pleaded guilty and is a first offender.

9 Offences under the Films Act are prevalent and the Legislature saw it fit to enhance the maximum punishment in 1998 to deter offenders from committing or repeating such crimes. In moving the Films (Amendment) Bill on 27^th February 1998, the Minister for Communication and the Arts spoke of the prevalence of such offences and the need for harsher penalties to deter such offenders. The Minister said (Hansard Vol 68 at col 474-475, 27 Feb 1998):

“In 1995, I spoke in this House about flyers being stuffed into HDB letterboxes offering...