Applying For Thai Citizenship

[Maizefarmer]

" .... was asked to introduce myself and explian why I wanted Thai citizenship. I knew exactly what to say due to the fact that the people from the National Intelligence Agency who visited me at my office told me what I should say if someone ever asked me this question....."

How interesting!

hel_l, what next - the process has become "complicated" - considerably more straightforward in the 1980's and early 1990's.

[sabaijai]

I knew exactly what to say due to the fact that the people from the National Intelligence Agency who visited me at my office told me what I should say if someone ever asked me this question.

Interesting. What are you supposed to say when asked that question?

[samran]

I knew exactly what to say due to the fact that the people from the National Intelligence Agency who visited me at my office told me what I should say if someone ever asked me this question.

Interesting. What are you supposed to say when asked that question?

When my wife put the application in, we were asked by the interior ministry officials. We responded that it was so she could have equal rights, stay here without a visa/work permit, own land, have certainty for our future.

We were told that was generally the answer they wanted to hear.

[Maestro]

I have now found a translation of the 2008 Nationality Act which I upload here but I haven't yet found a translation of the 1965 Nationality with the amendments from the 2008 Act added in.

Thank you for uploading the Nationality Act No. 4 B.E. 2551. I have now added it as item No. 19 in post #4 of the pinned topic “Useful Immigration Information & Visa Descriptions, Laws, addresses, download forms, Etc”

Also I cannot find on the web any Nationality Act already updated with Act No. 4, so for the time being we have to look separately at the Nationality Act updated with Acts No. 2 and No. 3 on the one hand and Act. No. 4 on the other hand.

--

Maestro

[dbrenn]

I knew exactly what to say due to the fact that the people from the National Intelligence Agency who visited me at my office told me what I should say if someone ever asked me this question.

Interesting. What are you supposed to say when asked that question?

When my wife put the application in, we were asked by the interior ministry officials. We responded that it was so she could have equal rights, stay here without a visa/work permit, own land, have certainty for our future.

We were told that was generally the answer they wanted to hear.

Right - that's what I said - I wanted the right to buy a home and have security for the future

[dbrenn]

I applied with the Special Branch in May 2007 and had my interview with the Interior Ministry in July 2008. I have heard nothing since the day of my interview...

Waiting for the Interior Minister's signature is the most frustrating part - let me know if you can find out your position in the queue. I tried but couldn't. The queue, it seemed was controlled by too many people within the Interios Ministry before the appliations even reached the Interior Minister's inbox - people that I did not have access to, but influential queue jumpers did, according to the Special Branch. The long wait after the Interior Minister signs is even more inscrutable - you are not supposed to even ask when His Majesty will sanction your application.

Apparently, the fact that I was asked to come in for an interview within just a little over one year since the date of my application was considered very quick. Evidently, some people had been waiting for their interview for a very long time.

They told me the same thing - around six months had elapsed between my application and my interview at the Interior Ministry. This gave me the (mistaken) impression that I had somehow been fast tracked. As far as the Special Branch part of the applcation went, I probably had. The Interior Ministry, however, took the average two-and-a-half years to complete my application and hand the result back to the Special Branch so that I could finally get my certificate of naturalisation.

When I applied I had been in Thailand for 10 years on continuous Non-Imm B visas and I had had my PR for a little over 3 years. The thing that proved my residence in Thailand was from my unbroken Non-Imm B visas

Intersting - your application was accepted with less than 5 years PR. Seems like they relaxed this rule in line with the guidelines that Arkady posted earlier. This rule has come and gone over the years.

Edited March 10, 2009 by dbrenn

[Arkady]

Thanks for your detailed post #120 Chief Justice. The varying times for interviews may be partly explained by the Ministry's desire to batch applicants up into groups of around 100 but that doesn't explain why some people have to wait for four years or more for their interviews. Perhaps some were unavailable when called the first time and were made to wait another couple of years till the next one. How much notice do they give you to attend the interview?

Actually I think the waivers of the five years' residence requirement (and logically the PR requirement with it) and the language requirement for men married to Thais under Version 4 of the Act could make the process even harder, if they ever filter through to Special Branch. That would certainly make farang applicants much less of a rarity and possibly intensify the scrutiny to make up for the now rather intense scrutiny that is done by Immigration during the PR application process in the case of those without PR. There would probably be a lot more applicants scratching out in the points assessment and more of those white cards handed out to interviewees waiting for over four years, effectively offsetting the lack of residence requirement.

I am sure they were genuinely impressed by your Thai calligraphy Chief Justice. It never ceases to surprise me how easy it is impress Thais with my own rather childish looking Thai script when department store sales people call their friends over to be amazed by my writing of my name and address in Thai on a form to deliver some item to my house.

Edited March 11, 2009 by Arkady

[samran]

I have uploaded the Thai version of the latest version of the Nationality Act 1965 complete with the 2007 amendments. If any one has an English translation, please post.

Thanks for that.

This is the thing that confuses me a bit about this and previous acts.

In the section on loss of Thai nationality - there is the pretty clear implication that dual nationality is allowed, and can be only taken away if you apply for it to be removed.

So:

1) you can have dual nationality by virtue of being born to a Thai parent, and a foreign parent.

2) you have have dual nationality if you take on your spouses nationality

3) you have have dual nationality if you naturalise as a Thai.

The only way it is taken away is if for (1) and (2) you apply to renounce it or (3) you do things that essentially are contrary to state security...

All in all, pretty standard practice internationally.

Then (and this is the confusing bit), you have section 22, which basically says that people who naturalise as a foreign national, renounce it, or have it taken away from them ย่อม (automatically/as a matter of course?) lose their thai nationality.

This last bit confuses me.

Is section 22 just a legalism needed in the legislation to make the removal of Thai citizenship a finality?

OR

Is section 22 a statement which means that people who naturalise as a foreign nationality automatically forefiet their Thai nationality

To me it seems contradictory to the rest of the section if second interpretation is the one which is accepted.....

Edited March 11, 2009 by samran

[Arkady]

Thank you for uploading the Nationality Act No. 4 B.E. 2551. I have now added it as item No. 19 in post #4 of the pinned topic “Useful Immigration Information & Visa Descriptions, Laws, addresses, download forms, Etc”

Also I cannot find on the web any Nationality Act already updated with Act No. 4, so for the time being we have to look separately at the Nationality Act updated with Acts No. 2 and No. 3 on the one hand and Act. No. 4 on the other hand.

--

Maestro

There is also another significant piece of legislation that came out in 2008, The Civil Registration Act (Version2). An important aspect of these amendments that has been discussed in the press is the obligation of civil registration officials to issue birth certificates to all children born within the Kingdom with or without Thai nationality which is of great help to stateless hill tribes people who formerly had difficulty in getting birth certificates.

Another aspect that I haven't seen discussed in the press is the obligation to register on a tabian baan all foreigners who are legally in Thailand on temporary visas or with special leniency to stay (the leniency category usually covers stateless hill tribes and refugees). This presumably does not include those on tourist or transit visas but sounds as if it should include all other types of temporary visa, including non-immB, retirement etc. The law is now in force but I don't know if ministerial regulations have been issued re tabian baans for foreigners without PR who don't own condos. This could potentially have an impact on nationality requirements in future.

Section 20. Paragraph one of Section 36 of the Civil Registration Act B.E.

2534 shall be repealed and replaced by the following:

“Section 36. The district or local registrar shall issue a household registration

for every house of both persons with Thai nationality and without Thai nationality

having a domicile within the Thai Kingdom.”

Section 21. Section 38 of the Civil Registration Act B.E. 2534 shall be

repealed and replaced by the following:

“Section 38. The district or local registrar shall issue a household registration

for persons without Thai nationality having been permitted to stay temporarily and

those having been giving leniency for temporary residence in the Thai Kingdom as a

special case in accordance with law on immigration and the declaration of the Cabinet

and their children born within the Thai Kingdom. In a case of permission of

temporary residence overdue, the registrar shall immediately dispose of such persons.

The Director of Central Registration shall make profile registration for persons

without Thai nationality besides those under paragraph one in accordance with the

declaration of the Cabinet.

Registrations under paragraph one and two shall lie in the manner prescribed

in the regulations under the discretion of the Director of Central Registration.”

The translation is a bit comical in requiring the registrar to immediately dispose of foreigners whose visas have expired but the Thai word is จำหน่าย which sounds less omninous.

I have uploaded the full translation of the 2008 Civil Registrations Act for any one interested. I don't the 1991 Version 1 or a complete one combining the two.

Thailand_Civil_Registration_ActBE_2551No2_en_.pdf

Edited March 11, 2009 by Arkady

[Arkady]

I have uploaded the Thai version of the latest version of the Nationality Act 1965 complete with the 2007 amendments. If any one has an English translation, please post.

Thanks for that.

This is the thing that confuses me a bit about this and previous acts.

In the section on loss of Thai nationality - there is the pretty clear implication that dual nationality is allowed, and can be only taken away if you apply for it to be removed.

So:

1) you can have dual nationality by virtue of being born to a Thai parent, and a foreign parent.

2) you have have dual nationality if you take on your spouses nationality

3) you have have dual nationality if you naturalise as a Thai.

The only way it is taken away is if for (1) and (2) you apply to renounce it or (3) you do things that essentially are contrary to state security...

All in all, pretty standard practice internationally.

Then (and this is the confusing bit), you have section 22, which basically says that people who naturalise as a foreign national, renounce it, or have it taken away from them ย่อม (automatically/as a matter of course?) lose their thai nationality.

This last bit confuses me.

Is section 22 just a legalism needed in the legislation to make the removal of Thai citizenship a finality?

OR

Is section 22 a statement which means that people who naturalise as a foreign nationality automatically forefiet their Thai nationality

To me it seems contradictory to the rest of the section if second interpretation is the one which is accepted.....

It is an interesting point and it is hard to interpret it in any other way than automatic revocation of Thai nationality for Thais who become naturalized as anything else. This may have been applied regularly in the case of Thai women who married foreigners in the days when most countries gave nationality to wives of their citizens with no residence requirement. Wording elsewhere provides for them to reapply for their Thai nationality, presumably after being divorced. The whole issue of dual nationality is still quite ambiguous in the Act with no wording that expressly allows it and there was no attempt in the 2008 Act to change this. The best one can say is that there is no way for people who are dual nationals by birth to have their Thai nationality involuntarily revoked. But naturalized Thais can lose their nationality just for continuing to use their former nationality and Thais with other citizenships by naturalization can have their Thai citizenship automatically revoked. Currently there seems to be no effort to enforce these provisions for run of the mill cases. There are many Thais who return to Thailand after years abroad during which time they have obtained another nationality. Often they have allowed their ID cards to lapse and it must be very clear from their pristine Thai passports that they have been using another nationality. I have known some of them and they have had a bit of hassle getting a new ID card but never been threatened with revocation of nationality.

Section 21 is also odd in that it provides for revocation of Thai nationality from dual nationals who obtain an alien ID book. Since it is so hard to obtain PR these days, it is inconceivable that some one with Thai nationality would go to such huge trouble to get PR using another nationality. This section must hark back to a time when getting an alien ID book was a mere formality that the government had introduced to make it easier for them to keep track of Chinese and other foreigners before visas and work permits were required. There may have been some distinct advantages in the days before computerisation for a Thai to apply for an alien ID book, e.g. avoiding military service, not having to pay the coolie tax or having the right to be tried by a consul.

Edited March 11, 2009 by Arkady

[samran]

yes, my mother, and more recently, my younger sister (who for various reasons, had to be naturalised as an australian...she didn't get it automatically like me) both entered to Thailand at Christmas on pristine Thai passports, which were happly issued in Canberra and London respectively.

My younger sister, despite not having used a Thai passport since she was 5 years old a new ID issued quite quickly and easily after she entered Thailand in December 08. My mum, had a bit of hassel, as after 40 years away, it turns out her ID number was stolen/sold to someone else...so it took a little bit of running around before her ID could be issued, but they eventually did after a few weeks of getting her ducks in a row.

Section 21 - you are right, does stick out a little. At first I read it as using a foreign passport, but you are right, it is for a Thai citizen who goes about aquiring an alien registration book - ie PR.

Edited March 11, 2009 by samran

[samran]

[quote name='samran' post='2589001' date='2009-03-

It is an interesting point and it is hard to interpret it in any other way than automatic revocation of Thai nationality for Thais who become naturalized as anything else. This may have been applied regularly in the case of Thai women who married foreigners in the days when most countries gave nationality to wives of their citizens with no residence requirement. Wording elsewhere provides for them to reapply for their Thai nationality, presumably after being divorced. The whole issue of dual nationality is still quite ambiguous in the Act with no wording that expressly allows it and there was no attempt in the 2008 Act to change this. The best one can say is that there is no way for people who are dual nationals by birth to have their Thai nationality involuntarily revoked. But naturalized Thais can lose their nationality just for continuing to use their former nationality and Thais with other citizenships by naturalization can have their Thai citizenship automatically revoked. Currently there seems to be no effort to enforce these provisions for run of the mill cases. There are many Thais who return to Thailand after years abroad during which time they have obtained another nationality. Often they have allowed their ID cards to lapse and it must be very clear from their pristine Thai passports that they have been using another nationality. I have known some of them and they have had a bit of hassle getting a new ID card but never been threatened with revocation of nationality.

Section 21 is also odd in that it provides for revocation of Thai nationality from dual nationals who obtain an alien ID book. Since it is so hard to obtain PR these days, it is inconceivable that some one with Thai nationality would go to such huge trouble to get PR using another nationality. This section must hark back to a time when getting an alien ID book was a mere formality that the government had introduced to make it easier for them to keep track of Chinese and other foreigners before visas and work permits were required. There may have been some distinct advantages in the days before computerisation for a Thai to apply for an alien ID book, e.g. avoiding military service, not having to pay the coolie tax or having the right to be tried by a consul.

just another point, my mother officially 'got back' her Thai citizenship in 1992 - presumably after the version 3 of the act was passed. She had a good friend working at the embassy in Canberra who rang her and told her basically she was automatically Thai again (she naturalised as Australian in the late 70's, after I was born). This says to me that 'maybe' they don't consider taking your spouses nationality as 'naturalisation'? I'm probably wrong, but it kinda fits as to why they don't revoke the citizenship of spouses?

I also only got my Thai birth certificate issued in 1992, off the back of the same phone call, despite being born in the 1970's. This still amuses many bureacrats when they ask to look at it. But for all intents and purposes, I am naturally born Thai, not naturalised....

Edited March 11, 2009 by samran

[Arkady]

just another point, my mother officially 'got back' her Thai citizenship in 1992 - presumably after the version 3 of the act was passed. She had a good friend working at the embassy in Canberra who rang her and told her basically she was automatically Thai again (she naturalised as Australian in the late 70's, after I was born). This says to me that 'maybe' they don't consider taking your spouses nationality as 'naturalisation'? I'm probably wrong, but it kinda fits as to why they don't revoke the citizenship of spouses?

I also only got my Thai birth certificate issued in 1992, off the back of the same phone call, despite being born in the 1970's. This still amuses many bureacrats when they ask to look at it. But for all intents and purposes, I am naturally born Thai, not naturalised....

You may have become Thai by birth retroactively as a result of the 1992 Nationality Acts which made any one born to a Thai father or mother anywhere in the world Thai by birth. The original 1965 Act provided for nationality to be transmitted to a child born outside Thailand by a Thai mother only in the case where it could not be ascertained what the nationality of the father was. If the father was declared to be a foreigner on the birth certificate, the child had no right to Thai nationality. Before 1972 this didn't matter to children born in Thailand because everyone born in the Kingdom was automatically Thai. Revolutionary Decree 337 changed this in 1972 and, although I can't find the decree, it must also have denied Thai nationality to children born in Thailand to Thai mothers and foreign fathers, if the father was declared on the birth certificate. Thai women in the know ate humble pie at the district office and declared "father unknown" on their babies' birth cerificates, getting them Thai nationality automatically that way. I know a Thai born in Thailand in the 70s to a Thai mother and foreign father who was stateless for the first few years of his life, as his mother didn't know the score and put the foreign father on the birth certificate. The British father unfortunately disappeared before getting him British nationality but his mother remarried to a Thai who adopted him which was the only way he could become Thai and attend a government secondary school before 1992.

Without Decree 337 I am not sure if anything changed in 1992 for Thai women married to foreign men regarding their own nationality but you are probably right in that it is not considered naturalization to take a husband's nationality. The Thai Act uses the word bleng for naturalisation but something closer to "adopt" for women taking their husband's nationality (I don't have a Thai keyboard here).

Edited March 11, 2009 by Arkady

[samran]

just another point, my mother officially 'got back' her Thai citizenship in 1992 - presumably after the version 3 of the act was passed. She had a good friend working at the embassy in Canberra who rang her and told her basically she was automatically Thai again (she naturalised as Australian in the late 70's, after I was born). This says to me that 'maybe' they don't consider taking your spouses nationality as 'naturalisation'? I'm probably wrong, but it kinda fits as to why they don't revoke the citizenship of spouses?

I also only got my Thai birth certificate issued in 1992, off the back of the same phone call, despite being born in the 1970's. This still amuses many bureacrats when they ask to look at it. But for all intents and purposes, I am naturally born Thai, not naturalised....

You may have become Thai by birth retroactively as a result of the 1992 Nationality Acts which made any one born to a Thai father or mother anywhere in the world Thai by birth. The original 1965 Act provided for nationality to be transmitted to a child born outside Thailand by a Thai mother only in the case where it could not be ascertained what the nationality of the father was. If the father was declared to be a foreigner on the birth certificate, the child had no right to Thai nationality. Before 1972 this didn't matter to children born in Thailand because everyone born in the Kingdom was automatically Thai. Revolutionary Decree 337 changed this in 1972 and, although I can't find the decree, it must also have denied Thai nationality to children born in Thailand to Thai mothers and foreign fathers, if the father was declared on the birth certificate. Thai women in the know ate humble pie at the district office and declared "father unknown" on their babies' birth cerificates, getting them Thai nationality automatically that way. I know a Thai born in Thailand in the 70s to a Thai mother and foreign father who was stateless for the first few years of his life, as his mother didn't know the score and put the foreign father on the birth certificate. The British father unfortunately disappeared before getting him British nationality but his mother remarried to a Thai who adopted him which was the only way he could become Thai and attend a government secondary school before 1992.

Without Decree 337 I am not sure if anything changed in 1992 for Thai women married to foreign men regarding their own nationality but you are probably right in that it is not considered naturalization to take a husband's nationality. The Thai Act uses the word bleng for naturalisation but something closer to "adopt" for women taking their husband's nationality (I don't have a Thai keyboard here).

Yep, I assume as you say, that I was retroactively Thai.

As for the act, indeed, it uses different langage depending on if you 'aquire' a foregin nationality from your spouse (according to their countries law), or whether you naturalise.

To an extent it could be claimed it was semantics, but it seems that the law seems fit to differentiate between those who get a new nationality becuase of their spouse, and those who 'naturalise' independently.

To this extent, it seems that Thai law may be similar to the old Australian citizenship act (pre 2004). It was possible in some cases to be a dual australian national, ie: by birth (like me), by migrating to australia and becoming Australian (while keeping your old nationality - more than a million brits for instance in Australia), and for a time, if you married a foreign national (a current British minister, Tessa Jowl I think, is actually an Australian also who became british as her husband was a brit - she retains both).

But up until 2004, if you were an Australian, and went out and voluntarily aquired another nationality, you lost your australian citizenship automatically (eg Rupert Murdoch). In Australia this has changed, and so long as you are of good character, you can get it back.

Interesting also you mention children being born to foreign fathers being stateless. I have a friend who's son was in the same predicament. The Father, was a former Aussie and naturalised Brit. The child was born in Thailand and deemed stateless and didn't automatically become British as the parents weren't married.

Took years for them to get Thai nationality for him. Fortunately for him, there have been recent changes in both UK and Australian law. His father has now gotten his Australian citizenship back, making his son Australian by decent. Britsh law has changed so he can now more easily pass the citizenship onwards (his parents since married).

So going from no nationality, he has gotten three passports. Pretty handy!

Edited March 11, 2009 by samran

[Arkady]

Samran, I now see there was a specific note to the 1992 Act (Version 2) making the children born to Thai mothers and foreign fathers before 1992 Thai retroactively. A lot farangs with Thai wives living here used to marry outside Thailand but not disclose the marriage to the Thai authorities so that before 1992 their children could have dual nationality and before 1999 their wives could buy land. Fortunately both these inequities have been cleared up now.

I have now found the basics of Decree 337 in a powerpoint presentation in Thai from the Bureau of Registration Administration's website www.borathailand.org. The presentation gives the definitions of who was Thai under all the nationality acts since the first one in 1913 and some ministerial announcements. Interesting for legal historians. It seems that Decree 337 revoked nationality from every one who it had through birth in Thailand but not through blood, unless given special dispensation to keep it. Later decrees restored it to those born to alien parents before 1972 and the 2008 Act theoretically restored it to those born to alien parents from 1972 to 1992. There seems to be a requirement for evidence of long residence in Thailand for those people to claim their nationality. So I think it is hard for some one in that situation to get on a plane to Thailand after a few decades abroad and rock up to an ampher to ask for an ID card. I upload it here in case anyone is interested.

History_Nationality_Laws1.ppt

[samkates]

Samran, I now see there was a specific note to the 1992 Act (Version 2) making the children born to Thai mothers and foreign fathers before 1992 Thai retroactively. A lot farangs with Thai wives living here used to marry outside Thailand but not disclose the marriage to the Thai authorities so that before 1992 their children could have dual nationality and before 1999 their wives could buy land. Fortunately both these inequities have been cleared up now.

I have now found the basics of Decree 337 in a powerpoint presentation in Thai from the Bureau of Registration Administration's website www.borathailand.org. The presentation gives the definitions of who was Thai under all the nationality acts since the first one in 1913 and some ministerial announcements. Interesting for legal historians. It seems that Decree 337 revoked nationality from every one who it had through birth in Thailand but not through blood, unless given special dispensation to keep it. Later decrees restored it to those born to alien parents before 1972 and the 2008 Act theoretically restored it to those born to alien parents from 1972 to 1992. There seems to be a requirement for evidence of long residence in Thailand for those people to claim their nationality. So I think it is hard for some one in that situation to get on a plane to Thailand after a few decades abroad and rock up to an ampher to ask for an ID card. I upload it here in case anyone is interested.

One of my good freind has got his ID CARD a month ago and now he is on his THAI PASSPORT becoz of this latest amendmend to those born to alien parents before 1972 and the 2008 Act theoretically restored it to those born to alien parents from 1972 to 1992. He was born in 1990 to Alien couple and since then studied here grew up here and got his work permit for working here and all of sudden this rule changed his life. He got all the proofs of long stay in THAI certified by his school, University and neighborhood. They required 3 local people to go to Amphur along with Applicant to proof whether how long he is living here and that'sall.

[samran]

Samran, I now see there was a specific note to the 1992 Act (Version 2) making the children born to Thai mothers and foreign fathers before 1992 Thai retroactively. A lot farangs with Thai wives living here used to marry outside Thailand but not disclose the marriage to the Thai authorities so that before 1992 their children could have dual nationality and before 1999 their wives could buy land. Fortunately both these inequities have been cleared up now.

I have now found the basics of Decree 337 in a powerpoint presentation in Thai from the Bureau of Registration Administration's website www.borathailand.org. The presentation gives the definitions of who was Thai under all the nationality acts since the first one in 1913 and some ministerial announcements. Interesting for legal historians. It seems that Decree 337 revoked nationality from every one who it had through birth in Thailand but not through blood, unless given special dispensation to keep it. Later decrees restored it to those born to alien parents before 1972 and the 2008 Act theoretically restored it to those born to alien parents from 1972 to 1992. There seems to be a requirement for evidence of long residence in Thailand for those people to claim their nationality. So I think it is hard for some one in that situation to get on a plane to Thailand after a few decades abroad and rock up to an ampher to ask for an ID card. I upload it here in case anyone is interested.

One of my good freind has got his ID CARD a month ago and now he is on his THAI PASSPORT becoz of this latest amendmend to those born to alien parents before 1972 and the 2008 Act theoretically restored it to those born to alien parents from 1972 to 1992. He was born in 1990 to Alien couple and since then studied here grew up here and got his work permit for working here and all of sudden this rule changed his life. He got all the proofs of long stay in THAI certified by his school, University and neighborhood. They required 3 local people to go to Amphur along with Applicant to proof whether how long he is living here and that'sall.

very interesting. Thanks for the update.

[Arkady]

One of my good freind has got his ID CARD a month ago and now he is on his THAI PASSPORT becoz of this latest amendmend to those born to alien parents before 1972 and the 2008 Act theoretically restored it to those born to alien parents from 1972 to 1992. He was born in 1990 to Alien couple and since then studied here grew up here and got his work permit for working here and all of sudden this rule changed his life. He got all the proofs of long stay in THAI certified by his school, University and neighborhood. They required 3 local people to go to Amphur along with Applicant to proof whether how long he is living here and that'sall.

Good to hear that the provisions of the 2008 Act are working smoothly in some clear cut cases and rectifying the effects of Revolutionary Decree 337. Is your friend a farang?

[Arkady]

I just met some one who said his application for Thai nationality was processed in under two years from application to Thai ID card. I didn't have a chance to ask for full details but it sounded like he applied in 2006. This sounds like a record.

[Pai2009]

Not so - all you need is:

1) a working knowledge of the language - enough for general conversation, the same as for PR

2) the ability to sign your name in Thai (however scruffily)

But singing the national anthem. I don't think I could sing my home countries. I hope they don't judge you on your ability to sing. I would never make it.

Good one

[Arkady]

I just met some one who said his application for Thai nationality was processed in under two years from application to Thai ID card. I didn't have a chance to ask for full details but it sounded like he applied in 2006. This sounds like a record.

I now have reason to believe this guy may have been bullsh*tting.

[Richard4849]

I just met some one who said his application for Thai nationality was processed in under two years from application to Thai ID card. I didn't have a chance to ask for full details but it sounded like he applied in 2006. This sounds like a record.

I applied exactly three years ago (in September 2007). My Interior Ministry interview was in August 2008. I received the Minister's signature in December 2009, and approval by the Royal Household in May 2010. I was fingerprinted and given the oath (at Special Branch) in August, and am currently waiting for the Minister's final sign-off, then publishing in the Royal Gazette.

I'm told my processing was pretty fast. Under two years sounds like a tall tale, but I suppose it is possible if the person has both Ministerial and Royal Household connections.