Police record and visiting Thailand

[Suradit69]

6 hours ago, Will27 said:

I don't know where you get your information from.

 

Of course he can be refused by an Immigration Officer.

Whether he has a visa or not is irrelevant.

Agree. Unlikely he would be refused entry, but immigration has access to information not available to Thai consulates and embassies (or to us here at TV).

 

6 hours ago, toughlove said:

Not sure what visas are available these days but if you want to be absolutely sure then go to the thai consulate. It will cost more but no way they can refuse him when he arrives
Peace of mind I guess

Being in possession of a visa does not "absolutely" ensure he would be admitted to Thailand. If something dubious pops up on the computer at his entry point (not saying it will, but if) immigrations can question him and possibly deny him entry.

 

Immigration officers of any country have the right and the responsibility to vet incoming foreigners even if they happen to have a visa.

 

 

 

[Colabamumbai]

This week a man was refused entry when asked, he admitted to having an arrest in his home country. Loose lips....

[stevenl]

34 minutes ago, Colabamumbai said:

This week a man was refused entry when asked, he admitted to having an arrest in his home country. Loose lips....

Better read the full thread. Your comment is suggesting he was randomly asked and admitted, which is not the case.

[catman20]

not worth speaking to a lawyer or immigration in your home country?

[Russell17au]

15 minutes ago, catman20 said:

not worth speaking to a lawyer or immigration in your home country?

You would be wasting your time as the IO at your point of entry has the legal right to refuse you entry even if you have a valid visa. It happened here last week with a chap having back to back tourist visa's and he had a valid visa from Malaysia but he was refused entry by the IO at the airport. This is how it works in all the other countries as well.

No guarantee on you being able to enter a country even if you have a valid visa.

[007 RED]

3 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

You would be wasting your time as the IO at your point of entry has the legal right to refuse you entry even if you have a valid visa. It happened here last week with a chap having back to back tourist visa's and he had a valid visa from Malaysia but he was refused entry by the IO at the airport. This is how it works in all the other countries as well.

No guarantee on you being able to enter a country even if you have a valid visa.

You are correct when you say that the decision to allow anyone to enter the country is at the discretion of the IO - That applies to any country not just Thailand.

 

However, with the case that you referred to, it now transpires that the individual had been living and apparently working on tourist visas for 7 years, so its not surprising that he eventually got an entry refusal.

[Tony125]

8 hours ago, dennis D said:

I meant the Thai Embassy. Someone else has posted in the site that they got refused entry for a crime from 25 years ago and much lesser crime. They visited Thailand before then when they went back they got refused entry.

That was because when visiting Thailand before---- that person committed an offense here so that record would be on file since that person was banned/blacklisted

[logres212]

In Australia if a conviction is 10 years or more ago and the time served is 30 months or less, the conviction is considered "spent" and is sealed and can only be viewed by applying to a Australian court. So a conviction wouldn't be visible on looking at a normal data base by immigration or police.( there are some exceptions)  Check Aus. Government website for full info.

[stevenl]

38 minutes ago, Tony125 said:

That was because when visiting Thailand before---- that person committed an offense here so that record would be on file since that person was banned/blacklisted

No, that was not the reason. Read the thread.

[Russell17au]

We are all only guessing because I believe that a lot of the information is not being released and that all the information we are being told is by a third person who really does not know everything either, but at the end of the day the IO at the entry point has the legal right to refuse entry, which is what has happened. We have not seen the refusal stamp in the chaps passport which would show what part of the immigration act he was in breach of.

[Different]

If pedophiles enter Thailand without being noticed by Thai officials!

Go figure.

[Russell17au]

Unless he is listed on the International Sex Offenders Register through Interpol then I would say he has no problem, but he must remember that even if he has a valid visa he can still be refused entry at the entry point by the IO the same as anyone else can be

[dennis D]

12 hours ago, catman20 said:

not worth speaking to a lawyer or immigration in your home country?

That is what I am trying to find out. If we can go to the Embassy and explain the case they may approve the visit.

 

[dennis D]

9 hours ago, Russell17au said:

Unless he is listed on the International Sex Offenders Register through Interpol then I would say he has no problem, but he must remember that even if he has a valid visa he can still be refused entry at the entry point by the IO the same as anyone else can be

He does not know if he is our not. He does not need to tell the police when he moves address or has new car rego details like some sex offenders.

[dennis D]

11 hours ago, logres212 said:

In Australia if a conviction is 10 years or more ago and the time served is 30 months or less, the conviction is considered "spent" and is sealed and can only be viewed by applying to a Australian court. So a conviction wouldn't be visible on looking at a normal data base by immigration or police.( there are some exceptions)  Check Aus. Government website for full info.

That is not the case anymore for current sex offenders. It stays there for life, and so it should. But still he will be with people at all times and only there for 4 days. He tried to get a clearance to work in a soup kitchen a few months ago and was not able to get it. His job would be in the kitchen, not with the public that visited the soup kitchen and its been 13 years now and they still knocked him back.

Edited January 30, 2018 by dennis D

[Russell17au]

3 hours ago, dennis D said:

That is what I am trying to find out. If we can go to the Embassy and explain the case they may approve the visit.

 

The Embassy cannot approve the visit but it is still up to the IO at his point of entry, all the Embassy can do is issue him with a visa. The person that he must convince is the IO at his point of entry, no one else except the IO

[simple1]

23 hours ago, dennis D said:

Australia so I think it is the same as the US. As for what they class him as, I have no idea but he does not need to notify police when he changes his address or car ego details like some do.

 

Haven't read all the posts, but surely your relative / friend can ascertain if he is on a listed sexual offender register and if he is / is not banned from overseas travel or if his conviction info would be forwarded to overseas border control at time of travel. 

 

[BritTim]

2 hours ago, Russell17au said:

The Embassy cannot approve the visit but it is still up to the IO at his point of entry, all the Embassy can do is issue him with a visa. The person that he must convince is the IO at his point of entry, no one else except the IO

Beware! After an initial denial of entry, it is likely that an attempt to check in for a flight to Thailand will fail owing to the Advanced Passenger Information System. There is no appeal. The airline is responding to a DNB (do not board) instruction, and face serious fines if they let you travel anyway. If you really want to argue your case on entry, flying somewhere like Vientiane (bypassing Bangkok) and trying to enter by land might get you a sympathetic hearing.

[ubonjoe]

13 minutes ago, BritTim said:

Beware! After an initial denial of entry, it is likely that an attempt to check in for a flight to Thailand will fail owing to the Advanced Passenger Information System.

Not sure a denial of entry would trigger a do not board. It would need to be a blacklisting or similar.

[Tony125]

17 hours ago, stevenl said:

No, that was not the reason. Read the thread.

Ok read the thread  my mistake but I was referring to a previous post of a woman who was refused entry for a drug conviction 20+ years ago.

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, ubonjoe said:

1 hour ago, BritTim said:

Beware! After an initial denial of entry, it is likely that an attempt to check in for a flight to Thailand will fail owing to the Advanced Passenger Information System.

Not sure a denial of entry would trigger a do not board. It would need to be a blacklisting or similar.

You may be right, but I would have expected the senior immigration official to have put an annotation on the guy's record noting the prison term. I think it quite likely that this would generate a prompt for an official to make a decision. If the official thinks it likely entry would be denied again, I think they would try to prevent boarding. Of course, I am making assumptions here about how APIS and Thailand's immigration system interact.

[Russell17au]

Your brother has never had a passport and needs to apply for one.

This is a notice on the collection, use and disclosure of your personal information when applying for an Australian passport.

The Australian Passports Act 2005 authorises the Australian Passport Office of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade to collect the personal information provided with your application for an Australian passport, including supporting documents and photos, to determine your eligibility. Without this information we are unable to process the application.

We may also collect personal information from third parties such as law enforcement or security agencies where the third parties provide us with information which is relevant to your application for a passport.

We are authorised by law to disclose your personal information to foreign border authorities:

1: Interpol and its member countries; other countries with which we have an agreement for purposes such as advising about the status of a passport; law enforcement authorities; to Australian border authorities to facilitate international travel; and law courts for the operation of family law and related matters.

 2: if we suspect there is unlawful activity relating to the passport

3: for law enforcement purposes

4: in countries with which Australia participates in the Regional Movement Alert System

https://ppol.passports.gov.au/Web/Forms/Passport/Adult/PC1_notes_sr.pdf

[Mattd]

36 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

4: in countries with which Australia participates in the Regional Movement Alert System

Regional Movement Alert System

1. The country specific information will be removed from the list of persons to whom information may be disclosed for the purposes of implementing the Regional Movement Alert System (RMAS) with all foreign border agencies.

The purpose of these amendments is to support the operation of RMAS between Australia and participating countries; an APEC counter-terrorism initiative designed to strengthen the capacity of participating economies to detect lost, stolen and invalid (including counterfeit) travel documents.

Amending the Determination in the manner proposed will enable Australia to enter into new agreements with APEC members as they seek to join without the need to amend the Determination on each occasion to provide for disclosure to the particular new participant. RMAS does not involve countries directly accessing or transferring each other’s passport data. Data is not exchanged. Through the RMAS electronic broker system, passengers’ passport data is verified prior to entry to a participant country. The response is limited to a “Y” for a valid passport or a “N” for an invalid passport. The US, Philippines and New Zealand are already participants in the scheme. This is reflected in the current Determination.

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection has been working for some time to implement RMAS with Thailand.

Source: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2014L01194/0c3db335-7496-478e-be8d-2cb3eed68d90

 

See also: https://www.icao.int/Meetings/TAG-MRTD/Documents/Tag-Mrtd-18/TagMrtd18_ip05.pdf

 

This appears to work in conjunction with APIS, an enhancement if you like.

 

It is seemingly intended for counter terrorism.

[Russell17au]

15 minutes ago, Mattd said:

Regional Movement Alert System

1. The country specific information will be removed from the list of persons to whom information may be disclosed for the purposes of implementing the Regional Movement Alert System (RMAS) with all foreign border agencies.

The purpose of these amendments is to support the operation of RMAS between Australia and participating countries; an APEC counter-terrorism initiative designed to strengthen the capacity of participating economies to detect lost, stolen and invalid (including counterfeit) travel documents.

Amending the Determination in the manner proposed will enable Australia to enter into new agreements with APEC members as they seek to join without the need to amend the Determination on each occasion to provide for disclosure to the particular new participant. RMAS does not involve countries directly accessing or transferring each other’s passport data. Data is not exchanged. Through the RMAS electronic broker system, passengers’ passport data is verified prior to entry to a participant country. The response is limited to a “Y” for a valid passport or a “N” for an invalid passport. The US, Philippines and New Zealand are already participants in the scheme. This is reflected in the current Determination.

The Department of Immigration and Border Protection has been working for some time to implement RMAS with Thailand.

Source: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2014L01194/0c3db335-7496-478e-be8d-2cb3eed68d90

 

See also: https://www.icao.int/Meetings/TAG-MRTD/Documents/Tag-Mrtd-18/TagMrtd18_ip05.pdf

 

This appears to work in conjunction with APIS, an enhancement if you like.

 

It is seemingly intended for counter terrorism.

Yes, this is your Regional Alert System but the other section they are authorized by law that they can notify another country of your criminal record

[007 RED]

2 hours ago, Russell17au said:

 

We may also collect personal information from third parties such as law enforcement or security agencies where the third parties provide us with information which is relevant to your application for a passport.

We are authorised by law to disclose your personal information to foreign border authorities:

1: Interpol and its member countries; other countries with which we have an agreement for purposes such as advising about the status of a passport; law enforcement authorities; to Australian border authorities to facilitate international travel; and law courts for the operation of family law and related matters.

 2: if we suspect there is unlawful activity relating to the passport

3: for law enforcement purposes

4: in countries with which Australia participates in the Regional Movement Alert System

https://ppol.passports.gov.au/Web/Forms/Passport/Adult/PC1_notes_sr.pdf

It is common practice for most passport issuing authorities throughout the world to request information from a number of in-country agencies, including law enforcement and security agencies.  Such request are made to facilitate the authentication of the application.  The request is not for a breakdown of the applicant’s criminal history etc.

 

In some very rare cases, law enforcement may advise the passport issuing authority that the individual is subject to Court Order preventing travel outside the applicant’s country.

 

FYI – In October 2017 the USA introduced Megan’s Law which specifically prohibits the Department of State from issuing passports to a registered sex offender without a ‘unique identifier’.  It also allows for the cancellation of passports that have been previously issued to such offenders that do not have the ‘unique identifier’.

 

The ‘unique identifier’ is in fact an endorsement on the last page of the passport that reads: “The bearer was convicted of a sex offense against a minor, and is a covered sex offender pursuant to 22 United States Code Section 212b(c)(l).”

 

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/News/passports/passports-and-international-megans-law.html

 

Regarding the paragraph which indicates that the passport issuing authority are authorised to disclose your personal information to foreign boarder authorities, again is standard procedure. This does not mean that they are going to send the all applicants personal information, including any criminal history, to every immigration and law enforcement service throughout the world.  That would be both totally excessive and impractical.

 

What this means is, for example, if Thai immigration suspected that the person’s passport was fake, or they suspect that the person is not who they say they are, the Australian passport authority will provide such information as is necessary to assist Thai immigration with their investigation.

 

The statements which you have reproduced from Section 4 (Notice of collection, use and disclosure of your personal information) of the Australian passport application form is there to comply with the Australian Privacy Act, and this is again fairly standard practice in most countries so as to ensure that the applicant is aware of why they are collecting the information, how it is be use and with whom it may be shared with.

[Russell17au]

5 minutes ago, 007 RED said:

It is common practice for most passport issuing authorities throughout the world to request information from a number of in-country agencies, including law enforcement and security agencies.  Such request are made to facilitate the authentication of the application.  The request is not for a breakdown of the applicant’s criminal history etc.

 

In some very rare cases, law enforcement may advise the passport issuing authority that the individual is subject to Court Order preventing travel outside the applicant’s country.

 

FYI – In October 2017 the USA introduced Megan’s Law which specifically prohibits the Department of State from issuing passports to a registered sex offender without a ‘unique identifier’.  It also allows for the cancellation of passports that have been previously issued to such offenders that do not have the ‘unique identifier’.

 

The ‘unique identifier’ is in fact an endorsement on the last page of the passport that reads: “The bearer was convicted of a sex offense against a minor, and is a covered sex offender pursuant to 22 United States Code Section 212b(c)(l).”

 

https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/News/passports/passports-and-international-megans-law.html

 

Regarding the paragraph which indicates that the passport issuing authority are authorised to disclose your personal information to foreign boarder authorities, again is standard procedure. This does not mean that they are going to send the all applicants personal information, including any criminal history, to every immigration and law enforcement service throughout the world.  That would be both totally excessive and impractical.

 

What this means is, for example, if Thai immigration suspected that the person’s passport was fake, or they suspect that the person is not who they say they are, the Australian passport authority will provide such information as is necessary to assist Thai immigration with their investigation.

 

The statements which you have reproduced from Section 4 (Notice of collection, use and disclosure of your personal information) of the Australian passport application form is there to comply with the Australian Privacy Act, and this is again fairly standard practice in most countries so as to ensure that the applicant is aware of why they are collecting the information, how it is be use and with whom it may be shared with.

I know all about Megan's Law and I know all about Section 4 and I know what it is used for and how it is used

[007 RED]

11 minutes ago, Russell17au said:

I know all about Megan's Law and I know all about Section 4 and I know what it is used for and how it is used

OK so you know all about these things but the OP, and others, who may be less informed than yourself may be under the impression from your post that the passport issuing authority collect every scrap of information from all and sundry and pass it into the rest of the world.  So some clarification does not hurt.

 

[007 RED]

6 hours ago, BritTim said:

Beware! After an initial denial of entry, it is likely that an attempt to check in for a flight to Thailand will fail owing to the Advanced Passenger Information System.

Tim….  A refused entry would not trigger a ‘do not board’ message via the Advanced Passenger Information System (APIS).

 

As you are well aware a person can be refused entry for any number of reasons.

 

Let’s say (hypothetically) that you were refused entry because you did not have 20K BHT in your pocket when asked by the IO.  If that refusal subsequently triggered a ‘do not board message’ via APIS, that would mean that you would never be able to fly into Thailand ever again because each time you tried to check in for a flight to Thailand, even with 10m Baht in your pocket, the airline would refuse to carry you.  I would imagine that you would not be a happy bunny.

 

Generally, ‘do not board’ messages via APIS are only activated for serious concerns such as an individual having been banned.

Edited January 31, 2018 by 007 RED