Airport JAIL!

[my friend I]

It sounds like he is not in jail but in the detention dorm at the airport.

[Jeffrey346]

Why hasn't he contacted the US Consulate. 

[stevenl]

17 minutes ago, Jeffrey346 said:

Why hasn't he contacted the US Consulate. 

Already in the OP and later it is mentioned he is trying to get help from the US embassy.

[uncleeagle]

If the required airline went bust over night would he have to spend the rest of his life in this jail? This is Thailand, the land logic and reasonableness forgot, so I won't say no.

[smotherb]

17 hours ago, poohy said:

Thinking about this with my old Operation managers head on, maybe and in all probability there's some law (airline agreement) regarding he has to be repatriated by original  incoming airline otherwise they are liable for a penalty fine.

 

Can he speak directly to airline Are there no seats to USA till monday OR no Flights?

I was thinking along those lines. Since his return was paid from Ukraine; who paid it, the Ukrainians, or did they somehow charge the Thais?  What airline was it, a Thai airline?

Edited February 2, 2018 by smotherb

[bangkoken]

17 hours ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

In retrospect, it would seem that choice was a pretty big mistake on his part, unfortunately.

 

Meanwhile, why is no one here asking -- why would Ukraine be deporting a U.S. citizen attempting to enter their country because he had, according to the poster here, a ONE day overstay on his prior tourist visa???

 

By contrast, if you have a tourist visa in Thailand and overstay by one day, you pay a relatively small fine at exit and go on your way. And AFAIK, having a one day overstay in Thailand now doesn't harm or impair your ability to come back later on a subsequent tourist visa...

 

So someone should be asking, what the heck is up with Ukraine?

 

A qualified attorney can have him on his way in a matter of hours. The Kingdom Law Group is an excellent firm that I have used in the past.

[Russell17au]

6 hours ago, JohnThailandJohn said:

1. He is not allowed to enter Thailand given his refusal to enter Ukraine.

 

2. Airlines are responsible for returning passengers when they are not allowed to enter a country. (this is why they make sure you have passport, return ticket....)

3. There is a process which takes place that likely includes immigration officers escorting him to the plane and handing his passport to the Airplane's staff to ensure he doesn't try to go somewhere else.

 

It is unfair to request another airline to be responsible for him returning home. It is almost a punitive punishment against the airline who brought him to a country he is not allowed to enter by forcing them to correct the situation at their cost.

 

IMO, Ukraine should have given him the option to fly to the US, since he is a US Citizen and should have known he would be refused entry to Thailand. 

Ukraine did give him the option to fly to either Thailand or the US.

The reason that he was given the return to Thailand option is because that is where he come from on this trip, as any "refuse to enter" person is sent back to the country where they have just come from or their home country, it is different to a person who is "deported" they are sent back to their home country without any option.

[DipStick]

There are similarities with this case and the recent Zimbabwean families situation, except they were not locked away!

[Tanoshi]

36 minutes ago, smotherb said:

I was thinking along those lines. Since his return was paid from Ukraine; who paid it, the Ukrainians, or did they somehow charge the Thais?  What airline was it, a Thai airline?

The airline has to return him at their cost in these situations.

 

[jackdd]

18 hours ago, elviajero said:

He can lawfully be denied entry to Thailand because of his problems in the Ukraine.

 

Immigration Act

Section 12 : Aliens which fall into any of the following categories are excluded from entering into the Kingdom :

11. Being deported by either the Government of Thailand that of or other foreign countries ; or

the right of stay in the Kingdom or in foreign countries having been revoked ; or having been sent out of the Kingdom by competent officials at the expense of the Government of Thailand unless the Minister shall consider exemption on an individual special case basis.

This law says "revoked", which implies that the right of stay would have been granted in the first place. But in case of OPs friend he wasn't granted entry to Ukraine, so nothing to be "revoked", so this law does not apply here. This law would only apply if OP would have been deported from Ukraine, which he wasn't, he was just denied entry.

So let's see if we will get more infos on why he was denied entry to Thailand.

[yan2016]

I personally was involved in the same situation a couple years ago...But my outcome was better then the OP friend. I flew to Manila from Bangkok and  was stopped and refused enrty in Manila airport couple years ago. I was told I am blacklisted from the Philippines and would be returning back to Thailand on the next available flight. Didn't get any refused stamp on my passport. Spent the night at the transit lounge waiting for my flight the next morning. Morning comes, 2 immigration officers escort me to the plane as I'm giving first priority as evrybody watches me like I'm some kind of murderer being escorted on the plane. I'm told that my passport is being held with the cabin crew and would be returned to me when I arrive in Bangkok.

 

I arrive in Bangkok airport and again, I get first priority as I'm the first of the plane. As soon as I step out the plane, the chief cabin crew told me to go speak to this man as she handed him my passport. I see he is wearing an immigration vest and first thing he asks me do I have a return ticket out of Thailand. I said no as I live in Thailand as I'm on an extension of stay based on marriage. He verifies my extension stamp on my passport. He then says do you have proof of stay like a contract, I said no, not on me. I told him in Thai where I live and he was happy and let me leave handing my passport back. No problem entering Thailand, was never asked about my refusal enrty to Philippines so I do find it odd that the OP friend being refused and thrown in detention?

[Jools]

No surprise that the US Embassy is of no help. They spend millions of taxpayer money and are worthless when dealing with the governments they are paid to deal with.

[Mattd]

21 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

The airline has to return him at their cost in these situations.

 

I am not questioning this, however, it does interest me as to why the airline is liable if the passenger has a valid passport, can enter on visa exempt, or has a valid visa and outwardly there is no known reason for the Ukrainian immigration to refuse entry?

I can understand it if the airline had not carried out proper due diligence in checking if a passenger is eligible to enter, but in cases like this, I would have thought that the airlines would have this covered in the T&C's for carriage.

[PerkinsCuthbert]

18 hours ago, darrendsd said:

He is not a tourist, he is somebody who has been deported from another country

Actually no; he was denied entry to Ukraine having inadvertently violated their immigration law previously, it seems. Not the same thing.

[Suradit69]

19 hours ago, mikebell said:

This story should be splashed all over the foreign press to warn other potential visitors how Thailand cherishes tourists.  

Why not "splash" the news about Ukraine not cherishing tourists since they were the ones who started the deportation/refusal of entry chain of events. Assuming the information supplied by the the O/P is the entire story, that seems excessive for only a one day overstay (something Thailand would not do) and Ukraine immigration ought to have indicated to him that he could not return when he departed the first time... again assuming we've been given all the facts.

 

You can hardly blame Thailand for refusing entry to a "tourist" who has been deported from or refused entry to the last country he tried to enter, especially if they have no concrete evidence as to why he was sent back.

 

Another drama queen event for some TV posters talking nonsense about cherishing tourists.

 

 

Edited February 2, 2018 by Suradit69

[Tanoshi]

33 minutes ago, Mattd said:

I am not questioning this, however, it does interest me as to why the airline is liable if the passenger has a valid passport, can enter on visa exempt, or has a valid visa and outwardly there is no known reason for the Ukrainian immigration to refuse entry?

I can understand it if the airline had not carried out proper due diligence in checking if a passenger is eligible to enter, but in cases like this, I would have thought that the airlines would have this covered in the T&C's for carriage.

According to the OP, his friend departed for Ukraine on a TV, having already previously spent the max 90 days in 180 days in the Ukraine.

The airline is responsible for checking he has a suitable and valid Visa for entry.

They should have checked previous entries from his stamps before allowing boarding. They should have been aware of the 90 day in 180 day period.

[yogavnture]

did he contact us embassy ?  can they help

[anon789561]

6 minutes ago, yogavnture said:

did he contact us embassy ?  can they help

most embassies can't do anything but put you in touch with family or friends who could help and very minimal legal advice. embassies nowadays are more for trade and investment stuff as far as i know

[yogavnture]

2 minutes ago, Happy enough said:

most embassies can't do anything but put you in touch with family or friends who could help and very minimal legal advice. embassies nowadays are more for trade and investment stuff as far as i know

i would think the us embassy has a channel to thai govt. and i would assume usa and thai govt have good relationship. they could at least speak to thais to get it sorted out.if he did nothing wrong here. it seems he should be able to fly home.

[anon789561]

1 minute ago, yogavnture said:

i would think the us embassy has a channel to thai govt. and i would assume usa and thai govt have good relationship. they could at least speak to thais to get it sorted out.if he did nothing wrong here. it seems he should be able to fly home.

the UK embassy also has very strong connections with the Thai government but if you screw up you're on your own pretty much

i can assure you, something doesn't add up. if he did nothing wrong i doubt very much he'd be locked up which he is apparently

Edited February 2, 2018 by Happy enough

[yogavnture]

3 minutes ago, Happy enough said:

the UK embassy also has very strong connections with the Thai government but if you screw up you're on your own pretty much

i can assure you, something doesn't add up. if he did nothing wrong i doubt very much he'd be locked up which he is apparently

i think u might be right. the "friend" is not disclosing something

[lkv]

Unless the OP departed Thailand on his very last day of his permission of stay, would it not be possible for Thai Immigration to cancel his departure stamp and reinstate his permission of stay, like I understand some other countries (Malaysia, Laos) do when people have been denied entry into Thailand and returned to Malaysia Laos etc?

Edited February 2, 2018 by lkv

[Mattd]

20 minutes ago, Tanoshi said:

According to the OP, his friend departed for Ukraine on a TV, having already previously spent the max 90 days in 180 days in the Ukraine.

OK, I must have missed the bit where the OP confirmed that his friend had stayed for 90 days in the 180 days, I was under the impression that he had overstayed by one day, although you are correct in that the airline did not check thoroughly enough, as he did have a stamp for this overstay in his passport.

Checking the Ukrainian MFA website, it appears that short term visas are not issued to US citizens?

There are three types of visas:

1. Short-term visa (C), allows stay in Ukraine for the period up to 90 days within 180 days starting from the date of first entry to Ukraine (not issued to the US citizens). There are single entry, two-entries and multiple-entries visas valid for the period of up to 5 years.

2. Long-term visa (D), issued for applicants entering Ukraine with the purpose of obtaining a residence permit in Ukraine (required by Migration authorities of Ukraine according to the legislation of Ukraine). Issued for 90 days (see details below)

http://usa.mfa.gov.ua/en/consular-affairs/services/new-visa-rules

[imjmn]

My Ukraine experience.

 

It would be interesting to know which airline he was travelling on and if it was a direct flight or via a hub?

 

I  was told I could get a visa on arrival by KLM - I flew to Ukraine via Schiphol and was denied entry to the Ukraine. I challenged KLM and in the end they said that it is at the discretion of the immigration officer at any point of entry regardless what the IATA rules state. the IATA rules indicated a visa on arrival was possible.

 

KLM put me back on the plane and told me I had to go back to BKK via Schiphol - to which I asked if I needed a visa to the EU (I hold a US passport) and was told 'No' - I had them check my bag back to Schiphol and deplaned and went to the Hague to get a proper visa - sorted no problem.

 

I then flew back to the Ukraine on another airline - never KLM again if I have my say - and entered with no problems.

 

MJ

 

 

Edited February 2, 2018 by imjmn

[Mattd]

4 minutes ago, imjmn said:

It would be interesting to know which airline he was travelling on and if it was a direct flight or via a hub?

Quote

Instead, he has to fly on the Ukrainian airline back to Ukraine and CONNECT to the USA through Kiev.

This from the OP, so it must have been with Ukraine International Airlines.

[NoshowJones]

20 hours ago, darrendsd said:

He is not a tourist, he is somebody who has been deported from another country

But tourists and other travellers should still know just how unfair Thai Immgration is.

[NoshowJones]

20 hours ago, Mattd said:

Normally immigration will make the responsibility of repatriation up to the airline that flew him to Thailand, although in this instance it would make more sense for them to let him purchase a new ticket and fly home to the US, it serves no purpose to detain him if he has the means to pay for a flight, pretty sure that they have the discretion to allow this.

Thai immigration using discretion?? 

[natway09]

If all as written is correct the above poster is right,,,,, why would any country deport someone who has overstayed by 1 day ??? Maybe the press should look at the archaic immigration laws in Ukraine 

not Thailand who are only following protocol 

[Enoon]

20 hours ago, darrendsd said:

He is not a tourist, he is somebody who has been deported from another country

 

You are quite right.

 

He is somebody who was welcomed into Thailand very recently as a tourist and has committed no crime or impropriety in Thailand, but has unwittingly fallen foul of the rules of another country, resulting in his returning to Thailand (with no "ill intention") and falling foul of "red tape". 

 

But, instead of helping him to sort the mess and sending him on his way most expediently, the Jobsworths at Thai immigration throw him in the Nick.

 

As Thai immigration have demonstrated, Thailand is a first class place to be a Jobsworth.

 

Thailand, Jobsworths, hub of.

 

 

 

Edited February 2, 2018 by Enoon

[BritTim]

2 minutes ago, natway09 said:

If all as written is correct the above poster is right,,,,, why would any country deport someone who has overstayed by 1 day ??? Maybe the press should look at the archaic immigration laws in Ukraine 

not Thailand who are only following protocol 

A couple of points I made in an earlier post in the thread that most people seem to have missed.

• No one was deported. He was denied entry (inadmissible individual). The distinction is extremely important. He may well have been denied entry for reasons other than the overstay (for instance, and likely the real reason, because he had already stayed the maximum 90 days in every 180 days in Ukraine). Other countries will look at the reason for a denied entry, and it is often inconsequential as far as entry into another country is concerned.
• There is no protocol that said Thailand could not permit him to enter visa exempt. Depending on the stamp Ukraine put in his passport, Thailand could determine that the same reason is good enough to deny him entry. Also, officials (since mid 2014) have a lot is discretion in denying entry to those entering visa exempt, and could have exercised that discretion.