Advertisement

Hong Kong court imposes tougher sentences on 11 laboratory technicians convicted of falsifying safety records for world’s longest sea crossing

  • Several Jacobs China staff were convicted in 2019 of falsifying safety test records for the Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge
  • Court of Appeal on Friday increases the sentences of 11 of those to between one and two years, saying original punishments did not tally with gravity of offence

Reading Time:2 minutes
Why you can trust SCMP
1
The Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge opened to the public in October 2018. Photo: Winson Wong
Hong Kong judges have imposed stiffer sentences on 11 laboratory technicians convicted of falsifying safety test records for the world’s longest sea crossing, which links the city with Macau and mainland China.
Advertisement
The defendants subjected to harsher punishments were among 18 Jacobs China staff found guilty of conspiracy to defraud, following a 2019 trial centred on the fabrication of tests results for the strength of concrete used in the multibillion-dollar construction of the 55km Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macau Bridge.

The 11 involved in the fraud for between one day and two months were originally each sentenced to three to six months in prison, or given suspended jail terms or community service orders. The other seven, whose participation in the scheme lasted one to two years, were jailed for 21 months to 32 months.

Three judges sitting at the Court of Appeal on Friday increased the sentences of the 11 to between one and two years behind bars, after finding the original punishments were far too lenient compared with those handed down to their accomplices.

In a written ruling responding to prosecutors’ requests, the higher court ruled that the sentencing judge had erred in calibrating the level of punishment based on the period of time the accused took part in the conspiracy.

Advertisement

By doing so, the judge failed to reflect the gravity of undermining public confidence in the quality and safety of the mega structure, the Court of Appeal found.

Wally Yeung Chun-kuen, who wrote the judgment, stressed that sentencing must be equitable and consistent among the same group of defendants to avoid giving the impression some were receiving unfair treatment.

Advertisement