TSI rejects appeal from Burmese woman sentenced to expulsion from Macau

A Burmese woman has had her appeal to remain in Macau on humanitarian grounds dismissed after the courts upheld an expulsion order.

The case dates back to 2015, when the woman, who has been living and working in Macau since 2007, was granted a residence permit to reunite with her spouse, a Macau resident.

However, on January 10, 2025, a ruling from the First Instance Court (TJB) found that her marriage was fictitious, as no actual marital relationship existed between the couple. She was subsequently charged with submitting false documents to obtain a residence permit and convicted of document forgery, receiving a sentence of two years and nine months in prison, suspended for three years.

Following the ruling, the Secretary for Security issued an order on May 15, 2025, declaring the residence permit and its renewals null and void, and denied her an exceptional residence permit in Macau.

The woman then filed an administrative appeal with the Court of Second Instance (TSI), arguing that she had lived in Macau for 18 years and had complied with the law while participating in civic and social activities. She also stressed that Myanmar has been severely affected by civil conflict since the 2021 military coup, leaving her without family or support, and that expulsion would cause her extreme hardship.

Invoking humanitarian grounds, she requested that the court overturn the Secretary for Security’s decision and either maintain her residence permit or grant equivalent rights.

After reviewing the case, the panel of judges at TSI found no evidence of wrongdoing or unfairness in the lower court’s ruling, stating that her unlawful conduct in obtaining residency had been sufficiently proven and that the sentence imposed was appropriate.

On humanitarian grounds, the court noted that while the Chief Executive may grant an exceptional residence permit under Article 11 of Law No. 16/2021, this is separate from the legal question of declaring an administrative act void.

The court also stated that humanitarian considerations do not prevent the validation of a null administrative act, nor do they affect the authority of administrative bodies to declare such nullity.

TSI added that the woman may submit a new application for an exceptional residence permit under the relevant legal framework, but this falls outside the scope of the current appeal.

The judges further noted that although the woman claimed long-term residence and potential hardship upon expulsion, these consequences stem from her own unlawful actions, for which she must bear responsibility.