J
-
4
4
3
3.
Section 3 therefore allows a discretion in sentencing so that in the case of male persons over 16, a sentence of caning can be substituted for or be additional to any other prescribed punishment for offences specified in the Schedules Cof section 3(1) & (2)7, or in the case of male persons under
16 for any offence not specified in the Schedules, corporal punishment can be imposed in lieu of any other punishment.
Recent Attitude of Courts
4.
It can be seen from the annexed chart (marked Annex A) that since 1980, the use of corporal punishment has been restricted almost entirely to offences against section 33 of Cap. 245 i.e. Possession of Offensive Weapons in a Public Place. It is, however, a notorious fact that sentences of caning are handed down for such offences, so that the magistrates can thereby avoid having to send offenders to prison for the mandatory period of at least six months, where Detention Centre or Training Centre is contra-indicated. Apart from these offences, for which sentences of caning have been imposed 46 times since 1980, caning has been the sentence on only 9 occasions for all other offences during the same period, with Assaults Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm topping the list with 3 such sentences. It does therefore seem that the sentence of caning is gradually falling into disuse, apart from the Public Order Ordinance situation to which I have already referred and to which I shall return later.
5.
The attitude of the courts is typified in the judgement of the Court of Appeal in KAN Chi-ping and The Queen, No. 933 of 1980. This was an appeal against sentence for four particularly bad charges of wounding. The sentence was three years imprisonment
and ten strokes of the cane. The Court of Appeal had the following
to say:
CONFIDENTIAL
/P.5
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.