Arkady

They have thought up some quite comical procedures in recent years.

- It seems that to apply the foreigner must have held a WP for at least the three preceding years without break and with the same employer? Last I heard from someone who applied a few years ago was that you needed to be with the same employer for a year before applying. They may have extended this to 3 years. - And the WP must still be current on the date of lodging the PR application. Definitely true - But can the foreigner lodge the PR application then stop work and return the WP? Technically correct. You can give up work after applying but I would recommend trying to hang on till after the formal interview, if possible. If they find out you are no longer in employment, they might say you are no longer qualified. I would guess that technically the timing for all your information being correct is the date that Immigration accepts your application but someone might interpret this as the date of your formal interview. - Or can the foreigner now change jobs but with the new WP issued quickly for the new job? I don't see any problem with changing jobs after applying. However, again I would avoid drawing attention to that, if it happens before the formal interview. - Or does the PR applicant need to continue the same WP and still hold the same WP on the date of issue of the Certificate of Residence book etc., if the PR application is approved? No. There have been a lot of cases where the applicant had ceased employment or changed jobs by the time they went to collect their PR books, particularly during the period before the 2014 coup when PR applications were taking up to 7 years. As always, the best thing is to visit the Police Senior Sergeant Majors on the PR desk with queries. Some of the requirements are not set in stone and are subject to change when new management comes into Immigration or the Ministry of the Interior.

1. Re WP. A good idea but a huge stretch. Government thinking is not that PR effectively is close to citizenship without voting rights, as in many other countries. The Thai view of PR is simply foreigners who have been granted a visa of permanent validity, albeit subject to endorsements for travel. In every other respect they are still 100% alien. 2. You mean the Universal Healthcare Scheme not the SS (Social Security) scheme which is open to foreigners in employment. They stopped collecting the 30 baht under the Sarayudh government in 2006 because the administrative cost of collecting it was found be more than 30 baht. This scheme actually started off being open to anyone on a tabien baan (not sure if yellow books were accepted or not) including foreigners with PR. I was sent the original gold card and you should have received one too, since you have been a PR for over 24 years. A few years later they cancelled the right of foreigners to join the scheme but those already in were grandfathered. Later they obliged foreign workers from neighbouring countries to join the scheme because they realised that excluding them and leaving them untreated for infectious diseases was a health hazard to Thais. So you can see the thinking. Foreigners with PR are regarded as having enough money to pay for their own healthcare and are not a threat to Thais. So the government will never let them back into the scheme, having already made a calculated decision to kick them out.

As luck would have it the provision already exists in the Land Code - Section 96 bis, as amended in 1999, allows an alien who invests THB 40 million in certain approved investments is permitted with permission of the minister to own 1 rai of land for residential purposes in certain zones. So it could easily be updated by just a few changes of wording here and there. But wait a minute. The 1999 provision was effectively sabotaged by the failure to publish the enabling ministerial regulations for several years, the expiry of qualifying real estate investment mutual funds before the regulations were issued and the consequent failure to make any new authorised investments available. Thus, as far as I know, no foreigner has ever been able to purchase land under the current Section 96 bis, although many tried. Let's hope they have better luck next time, if they do update the amendment. But it seemed that the initial proposal as part of the new visa offerings to wealthy foreigners had been dropped for fear of a local backlash. Perhaps someone is talking out of turn by trying to revive this proposal. I expect realtors would support it but virtually no Thais who are not in the real estate sector.

Many of the minorities who have lived in Thailand for generations were initially left out in the cold because they were nomadic slash and burn agriculturalists who, through ill fortune, were not in their main village when Thai officials arrived unannounced to conduct the first consensus of 1956. Those who were unable to get this fixed by 1972 were officially made stateless along with their unborn descendants by Revolutionary Decree 337 which ended the automatic right to citizenship to all born within the Kingdom and restricted it to children born to a Thai father or to two permanent resident parents who were officially married or a Thai mother officially married to a permanent resident. The decree also revoked citizenship from those who had become Thai through birth in the Kingdom to alien parents who were not both PRs and even to children of Thai mothers with foreign fathers. There was a transitional provision that allowed them to re-register as citizens at the discretion of the minister, which was usually granted, but, of course, people out in the sticks were unaware of this or lacked the wherewithal to make the application and were stripped of their Thai citizenship, often without being aware of it until they applied for a new ID card. , The above injustices were fixed for those born to Thai mothers and foreign fathers, who were often left stateless by the 1972 decree, despite birth in Thailand, through the 1992 amendment to the Nationality Act that allowed citizenship to pass through the matralineal line. There have been many cabinet resolutions and legal amendments aimed at somewhat redressing the balance for minorities. However, as Scorecard correctly points out implementation is left to local officials without much effort to ensure consistent implementation.

Since Note 3 says you need to have an alien book or a letter of permission to travel outside the issuing district, they are entitled to ask for your alien book which, of course no self respecting Thai airline, hotel or bank will accept as proof of identity and will fall to pieces, if carried around with you. Potentially a Catch 22. I guess many district offices can't be bothered to order the blank cards with that wording or maybe they just pick up the first one that comes to hand. The whole system is ridiculous giving PRs a card that was designed for stateless minorities without PR and later used for foreign migrant workers after they signed the MOUs with neighboring countries. It wouldn't cost much more to print some blanks that say "Permanent Resident of Thailand" but then, of course, PRs fall between two stools and between the police and DOPA, as they are still under the 1927 regulations that require them to carry their alien books around everywhere. The police are legally required to issue the alien books which PRs are legally obliged to have and DOPA is legally required to issue the pink cards, but only if requested and the Note 2 that says the pink cards should always be carried is not actually a legal requirement for PRs. Overlapping regulations but the police have a senior claim with the alien books, which probably explains why nothing is done to rationalise the system and issue a new smart card to PRs and scrap the 100 year old alien books.

Until 1981 foreign wives of Brits (but not husbands) could just take their marriage certificate to the embassy and get a British passport immediately. A friend did this for his Thai wife. Now it is quite hard for Brits to take Thai wives to the UK even as tourists, let alone get them PR and citizenship but at least they are not deported to Rwanda. When I arrived in Thailand in the late 80s the old hands liked to tell me I had missed the boat because it had been wonderful in the 60s and early 70s but had since gone down the drain. I bet you were told that you should have got here in the 50s.

In the late 90s they still accepted self-certified documents for everything except company documents but, as I was the company signatory, I had to sign those too. Documents in English didn't have to be translated. No need for home country police record and nothing from embassy. Not knowing what was to come, I thought it was a huge burden. I remember going into the office at the weekend to sign all the documents my secretary had prepared and it seemed like the pile was nearly a metre high. Considering that Immigration seems to increase fees about once in a generation, now that it is 20 years since the last increase, there may well be another one around the corner. Not only the fees for all types of visas, including PR, went up the last time but the financial hurdles for retirement and retirement extensions got massive hikes too. I seem to remember the retirement extension lump sum in the bank requirement, which is now THB 800,000 and 1.6 million for a couple was only about 200,000 for a single and a couple before the increase. A hike in retirement and marriage extension hurdles would cause a lot of grief and departures. Another good reason to make the effort to get PR.

That scam sounds so unconvincing that it's amazing anyone would fall for it but there's one born every minute like the Thai lady who CFO of Essilor Thailand and fell for a Nigerian operated romance scam. She transferred 6 billion baht of Essilor's money to the scamsters over a couple of years and never met the fantasy American Chinese man she fell in love with. I didn't use an agent for my PR but I couldn't have done it without a very efficient secretary. You certainly need some help of some sort, if you very busy at work. I did use an agent, who came highly recommended by a friend who had used her for PR, for citizenship for a short while though. That was because in the pre-coup period it was taking me an inordinate amount of time without even getting to the interview stage and I got nothing from regularly calling the police or the ministry. She did earn her money which was I think 70k by going to the ministry and finding out that the police had made a stupid mistake in my application that could have got me rejected, if it had been spotted only at the interview stage. So I was able to have the file sent back to the police to be corrected which took six months, rather than be rejected. After that the agent started saying that she needed at least 500k to pay bribes and dropped me as a client after a very insulting row with Mrs Arkady when I refused. After I got the application corrected by the police and resubmitted to the ministry the application actually went quite smoothly and fast. So I was glad I didn't pay her and suspected that she would have kept the lot but claimed credit for success and I would have been none the wiser. Someone who used her after me more recently against my advice later complained he got nothing for the several hundred thousand in VIP fees he had paid her. Those were my experiences but things change and I don't doubt what Misty and others are saying. As Jayboy commented, if you choose to pay someone it is hard to know whether they have the right connections to make a difference. You have no recourse because there will nothing in writing saying it was anything more than a normal fee.

Actually it had just got harder and longer when you applied, as Thaksin's xenophobic interior minister, Purachai, with property in NZ and PR and children at school there made things harder. Previously Immigration more or less guaranteed those fully qualified would get their PR before window opened again the following year. I did get mine in 1997 in just under a year a few days before they re-opened the window but there were two earlier batches that got theirs around June and September. Six months was not considered unusual then. Purachai also introduced the language test and the required documentation got progressively harder. Then things got even worse in the mid to late 2000s and they started making people wait 5-7 years which was the situation when the 2014 coup happened and straightened things out. A number of people were rejected out of hand in that period without being given a reason. A Swiss guy sued the Purachai in the Administrative Court for rejecting him without cause. The case took about three years going through the courts and the Supreme Administrative Court upheld the rejection on the grounds that the Immigration Act gives the minister complete discretion to decide whatever he pleases. The Swiss guy would have done better to save his money and quietly reapply after Purachai was dumped by Thaksin for becoming too popular and thereby a threat to him.

Looking briefly through the history of Thai cannabis legislation I see there was a Cannibis Act of 1934 that was repealed on the promulgation of the Narcotics Act 1979 which included all parts of cannabis and hemp plants and their extracts for total prohibition in Category 5. Under the Canabis Act 1934 it was considered a medicinal herb and the law was all about licensing for sellers. Plus ça change. After 43 years of prohibition which apparently achieved nothing Thailand is now reverting to the status quo of 88 years ago.

I have only started looking into the legal aspects of cannabis in Thailand in the last few days out of curiosity. I have a question for those who know more about it. Is hashish considered an extract over 0.2%? I believe it is made of pressed cannabis resin. Therefore it is not strictly speaking an extract like cannabis oil. However, it hasn't appeared on any of the dispensary price lists I have seen which leads me to think it might be considered an extract. The resin in Thailand may just be left with the buds to increase their potency.

The Cannabis and Hemp Bill seems to fill in a lot of the details of licensing, registration for home growers & etc. Also the ban on sale to under 20s, pregnant and lactating women (how to know if they are in the early stages of pregnancy or lactating?). I read in one report that import of a small quantity for personal use carried on the person will be allowed. It will be interesting to see if that makes it through parliament into the final version. It is quite common in Thai legislation for a law to be promulgated or amended with enabling legislation to follow. That happens with every constitution with organic laws filling in the details later. It has also happened with amendments to the Land Code, Working of Aliens Act and many other laws. Sometimes this laws cannot be put into effect at all without the enabling legislation, e.g. the constitution. In other cases they can. The Working of Aliens Act stipulated that the list of reserved professions would be amended by a ministerial decree within 12 months but that amendment was never issued and the law was revoked and replaced by a Royal Decree without any revision to the list of reserved professions. In this case one could argue it was inappropriate to amend the Narcotics Act by deleting cannabis except extracts over 0.2% from Category 5 without the enabling legislation. However, I think we can assume this was a case of political expediency. Anutin had the power the amend the Narcotics Act with approval from the Narcotics Committee simply by issuing a one page ministerial order. The Cannabis and Hemp Bill had to be drafted at length, reviewed by the Juridicial Council and go through three House readings (it is has just passed the first reading). With the government coming to the end of its term and with the risk of early elections, there was and still is no guarantee the Cannabis and Hemp Bill would be passed before the next elections. Waiting for this Anutin would have risked going to the polls with his key election pledge unfulfilled. Cannabis legalization must have been the main attraction of the MoPH to Anutin. Who would have guessed back in 2019 he was going to have to deal with a pandemic? With the pandemic and vaccines starting to recede in the rear view mirror, at least for now, Anutin is coming through as a man who, for better or wore, delivers his promises which could put him in a good position to become a future PM.

A Google translation of the report on the bill from the Parliament website. https://www.parliament.go.th/section77/survey_detail.php?id=193 The Draft of the Marijuana Act, Hemp, B.E. .... proposed by Mr. Anutin Chanvirakul, member of the Council (representatives of the people and the committee, has the following important points: (1) stipulating that the Minister, with the approval of the Committee, has the power to prescribe marijuana, hemp (draft Article 6) (2) Prescribing the production of herbal products, drugs, food, cosmetics, medical devices Hazardous substances used in the household and public health by using cannabis, hemp as raw materials or components in the finished product of the producer shall be in accordance with the law on that matter (Draft Article 7). (3) to establish a committee called the “Hemp Cannabis Committee” comprising the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Public Health; be the chairman of the board Secretary-General of the Food and Drug Administration Being a member and secretary (draft section ???? (4) to designate the Cannabis Hemp Committee to have duties and powers, for example, to formulate policies and measures to promote research and development on the use of cannabis, hemp both in medicine and industry, giving opinions, recommendations or recommendations to the Minister. or the licensor in the execution of this Act and the determination of tetrahydrocannabinol (tetrahydrocannabinal) in hemp, etc. (Draft Article 14) (5) stipulating that those wishing to produce, import, export or sell must obtain a license from the licensor (draft section 15). (6) requiring the person wishing to cultivate and planting must notify the information recipient who has issued the information receipt. to be able to proceed (draft article 18). (7) Assign officials, persons, organizations or agencies concerned to assess, examine and consider granting permission (draft Article 21). (8) prescribing that the fees under (8) (9) (10) at the rate of fees annexed to this Act shall be vested in the Food and Drug Administration (Draft Section 23). (9) to prescribe any licensee who violates or fails to comply with this Act give the licensor a warning or the licensor with the approval of the Commission suspends the license or revoke the license as appropriate in the case (draft section 25) (10) stipulates that the person whose license has been suspended may not apply for any license during the suspension period (draft section 26). (11) to prescribe any informer who violates or fails to comply with this Act; or ministerial regulations or announcements issued under this Act have the recipient notify him to give a warning or revoke the information receipt as appropriate in the case (draft section 27). (12) prohibiting any person from advertising unless receiving a license from the licensor (Draft Section 28). (13) stipulates that in case of violation Grant the licensor the power to order the advertiser to take any action such as editing the text, prohibiting the use of the text. Suspension of advertising, etc. (Draft Article 29) (14) assign competent officials to have powers, for example, to enter a place of production Place of import, place of export, place of sale or entry into a vehicle carrying marijuana, hemp, etc. (Draft Article 31). (15) stipulates that in the performance of duties The competent official must present the competent official identification card to the person concerned (draft section 32). (16) prescribing in the event that the licensor or the information receiver does not issue a license or information receipt Applicant or informant has the right to appeal in writing to the Minister within thirty days from the date of receipt of the notice of non-issuance of a license or a notification receipt (draft section 34). (17) to prescribe a licensee whose license has been suspended The license or the notification receipt has been revoked has the right to appeal in writing to the Minister within thirty days from the date of receipt of the notification of the suspension of the permit. Revocation of a license or a notification receipt, as the case may be (draft section 35) (18) prohibiting licensees from selling marijuana, hemp for consumption to persons such as persons under twenty years of age, pregnant women, lactating women, etc. (Draft Article 37). (19) Any person who produces, imports, exports, sells without permission under Section 18 paragraph one shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years. or a fine not exceeding three hundred thousand baht or both to be fined (Draft Article 38) (20) stipulates that any person who violates section 37 shall be liable to a fine not exceeding thirty thousand baht (draft section 40). people involved Ministry of Health Food and Drug Administration Ministry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation ministry

Here is link to RG announcement and a Google translation. T_0009.PDF (soc.go.th) Announcement of the Ministry of Public Health About Controlled Herbs (Cannabis) 2016 Considering that cannabis is an herb that is worth studying or researching is important. economic for the benefit of protecting and promoting sustainable use By virtue of Section 4, Section 44, Section 45 (3) and (5) of the Act Protection and Promotion of Thai Traditional Medicine, 1999, Minister of Public Health By the advice of the Committee on Protection and Promotion of Thai Traditional Medicine Wisdom therefore announced as follows verse 1 Give cannabis or cannabis extract which is a plant in the genus Cannabis, is a controlled herb verse 2 Allowing persons aged twenty years and over to possess, utilize, look after, maintain Moving, distributing, controlled herbs in accordance with the regulations 1, except for the following acts: (1) public use by smoking (2) utilization for pregnant or lactating women (3) sales to people who are under the age of more than twenty years Pregnant or lactating women R verse 3 allow medical practitioners to Thai traditional medicine practitioner Practitioner of applied Thai traditional medicine practitioner in the field of traditional Chinese medicine and Folk healers according to the law on Thai traditional medicine professions can take advantage of herbal control according to 1 to their patients verse 4 Allowing patients under Article 3 to possess, move, take care of, store, use in the amount paid for for use for thirty days. verse 5 This announcement shall come into force from the day following the date of its publication in the Government Gazette. announce As of June 16, 2013 5 Anutin Charnvirakul Minister of Health