Jump to content

New Regulation Does Not Require 6 Months Validity For Passport?


Recommended Posts

I went to cambodia and re-entered into Thailand by land with a 5 months validity on my passport, I was told by the immigration officer that Thailand law required a 6 months validity, and was warned that I would not be allowed entry again, and was given a 15 days entry as usual, though Cambodia side had no problem, or warning at all.

I checked on the web and found someone posted that the new regulation does not require a 6 months validity, but for the duration of stay,

There is no longer a requirement that the passport must be valid for at elast 6 months, the new requirement is that the passport
must be valid for the duration of the stay. (Airlines will now this and
can check this in the IATA database.) The problem is here that the
embassy doesn't know about this new rule.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/505152-passport-validity-dates/?hl=%2B6%26amp%3B%238208month+%2Bpassport+%2Bvalidity+%2Brequirement#entry4764899

I intend to do another border run to Cambodia for a 15 days entry, which means my passport validity will be 4 and half months by then, has anyone experience this, and if the new regulation is valid, how do I convince the officer, is there a number for them to call to verify?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AKAIK Thailand does not require 6 months left on your passport. However, you are at the mercy of the immigration officer at the border, he has the final say whether or not ypou cab enter Thailand... If he willl not let you enter then you can ask to speak to his superior, but it's doubtful that he would overturn the decision of the first officer - face thing. I understand that Laos strictly enforces the 6 month rule, I don't know about Cambodia. You should get a new passport asap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Government hotline 1111 can connect you to immigration office. AFAIK there has not been any public announcement but the check of IATA rules for airlines has dropped that requirement as below (this is US specific for air entry so could be debated - you can use link to check for your nationality) . But as said you need a new passport in any case.

http://www.staralliance.com/en/services/visa-and-health/

Passport required.
- Nationals of USA must hold passports and/or passport
replacing documents valid for the period of intended stay.
Passport Exemptions:
- Holders of emergency or temporary passports.
Visa required, except for A max. stay of 30 days:
Additional Information:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thailand nowadays just requires passport validity for the length of your stay.

Cambodia requires 4 months validity on your passport.

Laos requires 6 months validity on your passport.

Source: http://www.staralliance.com/en/services/visa-and-health/

Thanks, but is there a written statement where I can print it out and show it to the officer when question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you are making, it appears, border crossings with an expiring passport and probably suspected of illegal work by so doing I would not recommend pointing out 'mistakes' by those with full authority to prevent your entry. I suspect that is why they made the 6 month statement - so you do not use that border again for a new 15 day entry. You should have a visa but that is not likely to be issued in your current passport.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct

In order to get a tourist visa you must have 6 months remaining on passport.

Unless you plan leaving the country for your passport renewal you will probably end up on overstay because you might not get new passport within a 15 day entry period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never point out to an official that they are wrong even if using a document from their website, it is up to their discretion, the officer could believe you are illegally working here or anything and he can stop you entering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As you are making, it appears, border crossings with an expiring passport and probably suspected of illegal work by so doing I would not recommend pointing out 'mistakes' by those with full authority to prevent your entry. I suspect that is why they made the 6 month statement - so you do not use that border again for a new 15 day entry. You should have a visa but that is not likely to be issued in your current passport.

I will use the other border, I need some prove to show or I will be stunted, refused entry. Maybe not all are well informed, definitely I will not say they are wrong, but to tell them new policy from BKK... but, some proof to show.... As I do not need visa, just another 15 days will do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the above linked, I got this:

Passport required.replacing documents valid for the period of intended stay.

passport validity was not mention specifically, and also this is not from the Thai government or immigration site, they can simply say this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have done the Nong Khai-Vientiane run several times with an expiring passport and a couple of things explained to me.

My passport validity is linked to the applicable visa in my passport (not exemption ie - 30 day/15 day entry). So they told me my passport was expiring in 5 months but as my current visa was valid until after my passport expired I could use it to travel on until that time point.

Passport expires - April 04, 2013 Visa expires - April 23, 2013.

With an exemption they look at your passport expiry date not the departure date stamped in your passport as this is not considered a visa (ie tourist, marriage, imm-B).

Coming and going into Thailand has not been an issue yet however getting into and out of Laos is the problem. Laos immigration wants proof from the Thai immigration that they will accept me back into Thailand on an expiring passport. The Laos officials have told me point blank that if Thailand refuses entry on my return trip the Laos immigration will not allow me to re-enter their country. They photo copy my passport with the visa in it and have me sign a document which I have no idea what it states.

Not sure what would happen if some Thai official said no and sent me back? I have the feeling I would be "detained"

But as pointed out previously the immigration officer has the final word on entry into the Kingdom of Thailand, even if you have a valid visa in your passport they make the decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would be allowed to enter Thailand as illegal entry and detained until departure could be arranged. They will not leave you on the bridge. But you can not use your passport for travel beyond its expiration date - April 4 is that last date that passport is valid. Your visa would allow use of a replacement passport but not the expired passport - only the visa remains valid - not the passport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the OP should consider themself rather fortunate and heed the officer's words.

Also, considerable thought should go into deciding whether to point out an error in the judgement of an immigration officer or not.

More important is to get the facts straight, secondly will definitely not go into heaty argument. And at the point of deny entry, there is no other way out but to point out the fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the OP should consider themself rather fortunate and heed the officer's words.

Also, considerable thought should go into deciding whether to point out an error in the judgement of an immigration officer or not.

More important is to get the facts straight, secondly will definitely not go into heaty argument. And at the point of deny entry, there is no other way out but to point out the fact.
Sorry, I'm not going to win any awards for clarity in my previous post.

Considerable thought would include being sure (as one can be) that you have you facts straight and being aware of any other route that can be taken before saying something along the lines of 'you are wrong'. If at all possible try to shift the blame for the error onto some other person or body in an effort to massage his/ her ego or as we say in London... give him a little tickle. Within the scenario of this topic and indeed life in general one could be left in the position where there is only one route. This 'position' should be avoided and the method to acheive this is knowledge and forward planning.

I'm not saying you can predict the future but you can make a rational probability based on knowledge. The last thing you want is to be refused entry into the Kingdom and I'm sure you take precautions to avoid this such as attire, not being drunk, loud, offensive etc. etc. None of these guarantee entry but they do have a positive impact in that it reduces the probability of being refused entry. One additional piece of information which is often overlooked but should never be is this... The officer does not have to give a reason to refuse you entry into the Kingdom. You can prove that entry under 6 months PP validity is lawful but he/ she is not going to take kindly to this (loss of face) so may well deny you entry just because he can (gain face).

Your PP is going to expire soon anyway so get a new one to avoid the probability of it being an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see exactly what you mean, not worth taking that kind of risk, I am thinking the same thing, as the risk may outweight the convenience, really appreciate your thoughts, but also I and probably many others reading this would like to know if the new rule is valid, it should be in print, anywhere to find it in black and white? Or any thai government website to state it clearly?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So maybe IATA made a mistake, or the person who gave information to IATA was drunk. And IATA not checking on passport 6 months validity, has lead people to believe that the 6 months minimum is no more required, which is based on assumption, and not black and white solid proof from immigration.

I wrote to my embassy today and asked about the 6 months requirement for pp and was told still required for Thailand, so all these lead to one conclusion, the so called 'new rule' is based on assumption, misinterpretation. So those who did get into Thailand with less than 6 months were at the discretion and mood of the officer, but not the so called new ruling.

Well, I may be wrong, but does anyone have different experience on the 6 months not required ruling?



Edited by PoorSucker
Parts of PM removed.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also called the government hotline 1111 and talked to 2 different people and was told the same thing, 6 months ruling still stands, no exception, so for me, I am heading home for sure.

I hope no one get offended, and if some one has different findings, please share.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact is six month validity is not being required from first world passports and it is now officially noted in the IATA directives. This has actually been the case for some time but now it is noted when you check the IATA data base so there is no airline issue why flying without meeting that (previously it just said six months for all - but in fact allowed less for some at discretion of immigration but airlines would normally block).

As an example if you check "Chad" as passport six month validity is required - but if you check "UK" for the same entry "the period of

intended stay".

But many, most countries do require 6 month validity so it would be foolish to travel without if you have a choice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correct

In order to get a tourist visa you must have 6 months remaining on passport...

This is what the website of the Ministry of Foreign says under "Documents required" for the tourist visaa:

- Passport or travel document with validity not less than 6 months

Perhaps not all consulates implement this requirement but if the one where I apply for my visa does then I have no cause to argue against it. I don't think I ever applied for a Thai visa with a passport validity shorter than six months and therefore have no personal experience in this matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what is the rule, I come Thailand when I had passport validity 5 months. But I had visa, does that make any difference?

I have trust that IATA database but check what is says about Cambodia. Does anyone know if this is true? Now maybe understand Poipet officer 300b demand on visarun?

Warning:
- Day trips (i.e., arriving and departing on the same day) to

Cambodia are not permitted.
- Except when arriving and departing in Phnom Penh (PNH).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 7 months later...
So maybe IATA made a mistake, or the person who gave information to IATA was drunk. And IATA not checking on passport 6 months validity, has lead people to believe that the 6 months minimum is no more required, which is based on assumption, and not black and white solid proof from immigration.

I wrote to my embassy today and asked about the 6 months requirement for pp and was told still required for Thailand, so all these lead to one conclusion, the so called 'new rule' is based on assumption, misinterpretation. So those who did get into Thailand with less than 6 months were at the discretion and mood of the officer, but not the so called new ruling.

Well, I may be wrong, but does anyone have different experience on the 6 months not required ruling?

i was refused re-entry at chong saenam with 5 1/4 months left on my passport in january 2013. My local consulate told me it was at the discretion of the officer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...