I wanted to get something cleared up.

I have had this discussion many times with various farang and it yeilds very mixed responses and views.

When you are flying to another country from Suvarnabhumi airport and you are stamped out of passport control, then you pass through the security section, you are effectively in the departure lounge. So I want to know, are you technically no longer in Thailand at this point?

Does Thai law exist there?

What are the international protocols for these zones? (surely laws must exist to keep order there).

Do licensing laws apply?

I have tried to ask professor Google, but he can't give me a straight answer, so I am opening this debate. Is that zone the same as we have between the country of departure and the country of destination on a land border? Is it a 'non-place'?

Would be nice to get this thing cleared up.

Pretty sure you're still in Thailand. Not based upon expert knowledge but on simple facts such as if you are caught "stealing" from the duty free shops you will be duly processed under Thai "law", or rather held to ransom somewhere near the airport. And I have been in the Thai Airways lounge on an election day with no alcohol available.

My guess is it is until you get off the plane.

What laws did you brake or are attemting to brake in this "non-place" zone?

Good question for a no mans land. And like when your in transit stopping and transferring planes but not stamped in ?

Until you cross land border or leave a countries airspace 12 miles off their coast you still fall under their laws. The same applies when arriving at destination. The international space is covered by international conventions and treaties.

look up the cases where drug mules who got caught during transit. even if you are being stamped out of th, i guess you are still under thai laws

What laws did you brake or are attemting to brake in this "non-place" zone?

None at all, and don't intend to break any laws either in Thailand or outside of Thailand or any grey areas in-between.

Edited January 10, 201313 yr by klubex99

Until you cross land border or leave a countries airspace 12 miles off their coast you still fall under their laws. The same applies when arriving at destination. The international space is covered by international conventions and treaties.

That is a good point. But why are there casinos between the land borders if gambling is illegal in Thai law?

This no mans land. So is it an agreement between the two bordering countries?

In a land crossing it is a lot different to an airport, because a land border is an adjoining space between 2 countries, yet an airport is between the country it is in, and the 'rest of the world'.

Edited January 10, 201313 yr by klubex99

This topic has been debated by various states (e.g. France, Russia, etc.) claiming that travelers who were in the international zone of an airport were not subject to the national law (this position was taken to deal with illegal refugees). However, the European Court of Human Rights stated that despite its name, the international zone does not have extraterritorial status and that regardless of national legislation to the opposite, individuals in the international zone were subject to national law. Jurisdiction extends to the entirety of a state's formally recognized territory, which includes the airport's international zone. Therefore, until a plane is airborne, a passenger is still subject to national legislation.

Where ever your feet r on the ground nothing to do with stamps

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa app

The airside of Immigration is an immigration free area but it's still Thailand and subject to Thai law.

This topic has been debated by various states (e.g. France, Russia, etc.) claiming that travelers who were in the international zone of an airport were not subject to the national law (this position was taken to deal with illegal refugees). However, the European Court of Human Rights stated that despite its name, the international zone does not have extraterritorial status and that regardless of national legislation to the opposite, individuals in the international zone were subject to national law. Jurisdiction extends to the entirety of a state's formally recognized territory, which includes the airport's international zone. Therefore, until a plane is airborne, a passenger is still subject to national legislation.

Very good post.

One thing though.

There is a distinct difference between what constitutes legislation regarding 'rights' and what constitutes legislation governing 'licensing'. For example, could some entity apply to open a casino in the airport international zone? In a country where gambling is illegal but allows it to happen between its border with another country to the extent that they allow official operators to run package trips for gambling from inside its borders to the 'no man's land' casinos.

This topic has been debated by various states (e.g. France, Russia, etc.) claiming that travelers who were in the international zone of an airport were not subject to the national law (this position was taken to deal with illegal refugees). However, the European Court of Human Rights stated that despite its name, the international zone does not have extraterritorial status and that regardless of national legislation to the opposite, individuals in the international zone were subject to national law. Jurisdiction extends to the entirety of a state's formally recognized territory, which includes the airport's international zone. Therefore, until a plane is airborne, a passenger is still subject to national legislation.

Very good post.

One thing though.

There is a distinct difference between what constitutes legislation regarding 'rights' and what constitutes legislation governing 'licensing'. For example, could some entity apply to open a casino in the airport international zone? In a country where gambling is illegal but allows it to happen between its border with another country to the extent that they allow official operators to run package trips for gambling from inside its borders to the 'no man's land' casinos.

This is not no man's land.

The land belongs to Cambodia (the police patrolling there is cambodian).

Cambodia set up this special zone to allow for gambling businesses make big $$$. By doing its immigration and customs checks only after the casinos, Cambodia effectively prevents cambodians from gambling while allowing Thais in without border check.

It goes one stage further, your not out of Thailand until your out of Thai airspace.

Your still on Thai land until you leave the ground. What would happen if your wife gave birth in that area of the airport? the baby would be Thai even if your wife wasnt.

It goes one stage further, your not out of Thailand until your out of Thai airspace.

Well thats another what would happen if your wife gave birth over Thai airspace? baby would be Thai I assume.

Sorry for off topic.

It goes one stage further, your not out of Thailand until your out of Thai airspace.

Well thats another what would happen if your wife gave birth over Thai airspace? baby would be Thai I assume.

Sorry for off topic.

you assume wrong...unless at least one of the parents waws thai.

Your still on Thai land until you leave the ground. What would happen if your wife gave birth in that area of the airport? the baby would be Thai even if your wife wasnt.

You are referring to jus soli, which does not apply to Thailand since 1972. The babe would therefore not be Thai

Your still on Thai land until you leave the ground. What would happen if your wife gave birth in that area of the airport? the baby would be Thai even if your wife wasnt.

No, the baby wouldn't be Thai unless you yourself is Thai. Thai nationality is passed on from the parents and not from being born on Thai soil.

Sophon

Once I was stuck in no-man's land between Thailand and Malaysia - neither of them would let me in! I've heard of some being stuck there for months.

Your still on Thai land until you leave the ground. What would happen if your wife gave birth in that area of the airport? the baby would be Thai even if your wife wasnt.

No, the baby wouldn't be Thai unless you yourself is Thai. Thai nationality is passed on from the parents and not from being born on Thai soil.

Sophon

So not nationality just place of birth?

Then whys my daughter Australian when mums Thai? She was born on Australian soil.

Ok its if 1 parent mum or dad is in this case Thai, the baby would be Thai.

Edited January 10, 201313 yr by krisb

Once I was stuck in no-man's land between Thailand and Malaysia - neither of them would let me in! I've heard of some being stuck there for months.

Yes... I almost fell foul of the same situation many years ago in the territory between Tanzania and Malawi. Malawi would not let me in and Tanzania would not let me back. It's a long story, but the upshot of it is, I ended up bribing a Malawian immigration official for a 7 day transit visa. Without that bribe, I would have been locked out in nowhereville for god knows how long, as both countries refused to take responsibility for me.

Of course you are still in Thailand ........ I can just imagine someone trying to tell a Judge ........ But I wan't in Thailand ..... And the Judge asking: exactly where did you think you were ? !

I think this is the grey area between immigration laws and national law. Yes, you have checked out of the country through immigration but you are still on Thai soil. Land crossings are a bit different.

You could almost make a movie from this; call it the Terminal and see how we get on...................

What laws did you brake or are attemting to brake in this "non-place" zone?

I hate to be a grammar cop, but the word is "break". Brakes are used to slow down vehicles.

What laws did you brake or are attemting to brake in this "non-place" zone?

I hate to be a grammar cop, but the word is "break". Brakes are used to slow down vehicles.

So he was attempting to brake a vehicle in the non place.

And no, you can't get stamped out of Thailand, turn around and get stamped back in and call it a visa run.

Terry

go take a dump in the departure lounge, see who comes to deal with you.

obviously your police may be a little to far away so i dare say its a thai issue.

Some said you leave Thailand as soon as the plane leave the ground. Is it the ground or the national air space ?

For boat, for casino boats for example, you have to leave the national waters for national laws to stop to apply.

On the other hand when you land, the custom is some time preventing unwanted people to leave the aircraft. So it seems that as long as you haven't set foot in the country, you're not "in".

Edited January 12, 201313 yr by JurgenG