Is there an Expats lobby group to help Expats in Thailand

[thairastawoman]

The problem is that most foreigners have no balls and prefer to remain under the radar... invisible...

[kannot]

@ tthMan

We expats do have rights and we should be lobbying Thailand to allow us those freedoms that many Thais enjoy abroad, because without a voice we are just cattle that can be steered at the whim of the Government or an Individual, when they choose to do so. And perhaps a group can bring more international attention to the human rights aspect of the expat situation in Thailand.

To use the UK as an example. Giving rights to every minority group has led to the current state of the UK and many other Countries. I have to disagree with you, by saying that minority groups should not have a say that is to the detriment of the local population of whichever Country, those minority groups should be made to comply to the laws and customs that Country.

That is not to say that I am unsympathetic to what you are trying to say / do. I too have looked into starting a business here in Thailand, but currently deem it a non starter. I would even happily donate my time, free to the local school, if I did not have to jump through hoops to be able to do so.

In essence, I think we all, or certainly the majority of us knew the score when we decided to set up camp in Thailand. I do not think that we, as foreigners have any right to try and tell the Thai's how to run their Country.

Their Country, their rules and we should respect that.

and lets reintroduce slavery as well as those were the rules a long time ago

[Kudel]

The problem is that most foreigners have no balls and prefer to remain under the radar... invisible...

The problem is that expat clubs in Thailand have some members and leaders with some very dodgy backgrounds.......

Google is youre friend.

[Arkady]

If you want the same rights as a Thai citizen then the answer is to become a Thai citizen. Others on Thaivisa have done it. If you think it's 'too difficult' then you aren't really serious enough about it.

That´s a big hurdle don´t you think? At least some rights should and must be granted through marriage, which is not the case here. And not every country does allow dual citizenship. And who would want to be Thai only?!

To become a Thai citizen you need to have lived and worked there legally for 3 years. You need to pass an exam showing that you can speak Thai to schoolboy level.

To become a British citizen you need to have lived in the UK for 5 years. You need to pass an exam showing that you can speak English. You also need to pass an exam about 'Life in the UK'.

By the sound of it many of you are legally working in Thailand and are married to Thai wives and have been in that situation for more than 3 years. In that case, your are already qualified for Thai citizenship and can apply right away, if you have yellow tabien bans and receipts of donations to registered Thai charities.

The information about passing a Thai language exam to schoolboy level is incorrect. I passed that exam, Por 6 for foreigners, at the Ministry of Education but when I applied for Thai citizenship and proudly presented the diploma I had to explain what it was. I am not even sure if the exam still exists anyway because the law requiring foreign teachers to pass it was repealed when the law on international schools was liberalised and they proliferated. (Before that even principals of international schools could only get 3 month visas and work permits until they passed the exam which most never did.) The truth is that males with Thai wives were exempted from the requirement to have knowledge of the Thai language in the 2008 amendments to the 1965 Nationality Act. In practice that means that you don't have to sing, which is a huge hurdle for many applicants without Thai spouses. You have to take the fairly simple Thai tests (but not the reading and writing) but don't absolutely have to pass, as long as you can still get at least 50 points in the overall assessment. You need to able speak and understand enough Thai to be interviewed but your wife will be with you during the interviews and tests and can help.

The language and general knowledge of Thailand tests are considerably easier than the Life in UK test and, unlike the UK, you don't need to get PR first, if you have a Thai spouse. The process takes a lot longer and is not automatically subject to judicial review but that is the same for foreign wives of Thai men. The difference is that the foreign wives are not required to be working in Thailand. Instead their husband's must demonstrate taxed income of B20k a month (vs B40k for men married to Thais.)

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Soutpeel]

The problem is that most foreigners have no balls and prefer to remain under the radar... invisible...

The problem is that expat clubs in Thailand have some members and leaders with some very dodgy backgrounds.......

Google is youre friend.

The other problem is, if some farangs get into their head to form a "people's front of Isaan" in Thailand and made too many rumblings demanding rights, they could find themselves without a place to live very quickly, this is the key point, a foreigner is permitted to stay on the whim of a goverment official, if you get up their noses too much, and if its deemed your in violation of the terms of your permission to stay then bye bye.

The only viable option to get "farang" representation in Thailand, is for the Thai wives of foreigners is to protest and petion the goverment for change, but the next question that would need to be asked is how many wives of farangs would actually do this ? or are they just content eating Somtam, watching the soaps and getting money and dont really give a rats whether their husbands have "rights" ?

[dagobert]

The problem is that most foreigners have no balls and prefer to remain under the radar... invisible...

The problem is that expat clubs in Thailand have some members and leaders with some very dodgy backgrounds.......

Google is youre friend.

Just these two posts alone show that, the Expat community "should" have more legal recognition than is avaliable at the moment, so that we may be inline with the "Quality" tourist ? that the NCPO is calling for. A legal representative to voice the communitys

concerns other than an expat mothers club ? or a forum where we can bitch to each other.

[Kudel]

your sentiments are fine,but unrealistic.consider yourself lucky they've let you in.Go down to your local bar and sip a chang and enjoy the view!

Unfortunately, that sort of mentality wont solve any issues, neither is the mocking remark prior to your post.

I dont drink, dont play the fields and instead have 2 children in Thailand and have a wonderful wife that I met the first month I was here. That was eight years ago and would like to be able to buy some land and build a house in my name.

I would also like to open up a small business in my name and just build a future for my kids. To this day, my wife still doesnt understand why there is always immigration involved in our lives and neither does a few close Thai friends.

Nothing is for certain and I would like to have land in my name, should something tragic happen to my wife or circumstances change. As a husband, I take care of her and should I meet a tragic end or circumstances change, then she is ok and so are my children.

I am not retired and I have worked those 8 years, slowly building up my families finances and putting my kids into better schools along the way.

I would be very happy to start a small business and have the opportunity to leave it to my children to take over when they are ready. The same goes for a home and everything else we as a family have worked so hard to obtain.

Well put friend.

I belong to an expats club here in Pattaya and have participated in a large meeting at city hall that gave expats an open-mic opportunity to voice concerns, ask questions and receive answers from the Mayor, police and other officials.

Belonging to such a large and diverse group has given me the opportunity to network, share ideas and work on possible solutions to various issues concerning expats.

Those that opt to sit on a bar stool and negatively commiserate the status quo have that right, just as they have the right to make flippant and uncivil remarks on this forum.

The difference is that they are irrelevant and eventually will go away, either in a wooden box or via an airliner

So can you explain to us about said meeting .What have expats and tourists gained from such meetings what foreign ambassadors can not get after many meetings with Thai officials?Apparently it needed a coup to get stuff done in Thailand so what are youre so called merits in expat clubs and meetings with the mayor of Pattaya?Please let us know?

[samran]

Just read this thread and have decided the best name for this lobby group should be:

Foreigners Asking for Rights in Thailand or FARTs for short.

This thread is perhaps a good answer for why such a group has never been, nor ever will be formed.

Edited August 24, 2014 by samran

[Arkady]

As far as the broader issue of expat groups is concerned I think there is no harm in having expat groups or even one big group. However, once they meet the criteria requiring registration as a non-profit organisation, they would need to be registered which is an onerous process that, in my experience, can take 2 or 3 years and may be more difficult to do without Thai directors. The objectives need to be approved by the Ministry of Commerce which might not approve a group that appears to be simply a pressure group pushing for rights of foreigners against the Thai government. Normally non-profit organisations are carefully vetted to ensure they are political organisations and directors need to register all their assets and be prepared to take responsibility in the event of any criminal or civil litigation against the organisation. If not registered as proper legal entity, like a chamber of commerce, it would not be an official organisation and there would be no reason for government officials to pay any attention to it as it would not be an organisation with any formal leadership or anyone willing to take responsibility for its statements and actions.

[thailiketoo]

So can you explain to us about said meeting .What have expats and tourists gained from such meetings what foreign ambassadors can not get after many meetings with Thai officials?Apparently it needed a coup to get stuff done in Thailand so what are youre so called merits in expat clubs and meetings with the mayor of Pattaya?Please let us know?

Wasn't there a thread where everyone posted visa questions and Thai Visa was going to interview the head of Immigration? How did that work out?

[adamgordon]

Not really not having balls. For me personally it's just "in the too hard basket". Because the powers that be won't listen anyway. We all know that deep down

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect Thailand

[Soutpeel]

Just read this thread and have decided the best name for this lobby group should be:

Foreigners Asking for Rights in Thailand or FARTs for short.

This thread is perhaps a good answer for why such a group has never been, nor ever will be formed.

I was reminded of this when I read this thread, don know why...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE

[dagobert]

Or may be here....perhaps.......

[Kudel]

As far as the broader issue of expat groups is concerned I think there is no harm in having expat groups or even one big group. However, once they meet the criteria requiring registration as a non-profit organisation, they would need to be registered which is an onerous process that, in my experience, can take 2 or 3 years and may be more difficult to do without Thai directors. The objectives need to be approved by the Ministry of Commerce which might not approve a group that appears to be simply a pressure group pushing for rights of foreigners against the Thai government. Normally non-profit organisations are carefully vetted to ensure they are political organisations and directors need to register all their assets and be prepared to take responsibility in the event of any criminal or civil litigation against the organisation. If not registered as proper legal entity, like a chamber of commerce, it would not be an official organisation and there would be no reason for government officials to pay any attention to it as it would not be an organisation with any formal leadership or anyone willing to take responsibility for its statements and actions.

So why are certain links to website's run by people fighting the plight for foreigners being blocked on Thaivisa and so called dodgy company's run by foreigners allowed to do their bussensis on said site.

[mikebike]

Who in heaven's name wants to promote the bastardization of democracy which is lobbyists and special interest groups? The OP sees barriers yet there are viable solutions to all the issues raised without introducing soul-sucking farang special interest groups...

[canuckamuck]

I think the membership of Thai visa includes the people and the experience to get something official put together. Hidden amidst the rabble.

I think this is a topic worthy of serious discussion.

If it takes three or four years so be it.

[Arkady]

As far as the broader issue of expat groups is concerned I think there is no harm in having expat groups or even one big group. However, once they meet the criteria requiring registration as a non-profit organisation, they would need to be registered which is an onerous process that, in my experience, can take 2 or 3 years and may be more difficult to do without Thai directors. The objectives need to be approved by the Ministry of Commerce which might not approve a group that appears to be simply a pressure group pushing for rights of foreigners against the Thai government. Normally non-profit organisations are carefully vetted to ensure they are political organisations and directors need to register all their assets and be prepared to take responsibility in the event of any criminal or civil litigation against the organisation. If not registered as proper legal entity, like a chamber of commerce, it would not be an official organisation and there would be no reason for government officials to pay any attention to it as it would not be an organisation with any formal leadership or anyone willing to take responsibility for its statements and actions.

So why are certain links to website's run by people fighting the plight for foreigners being blocked on Thaivisa and so called dodgy company's run by foreigners allowed to do their bussensis on said site.

I was not making an official comment on behalf of Thai Visa. I was giving my personal views on what I think would be the legal situation. If you have issues with TV policies, please address Admin direct. I will add in another post that I believe that, if it is to be taken seriously, lobbying on specific issues like equal citizenship rights for foreign husbands of Thai citizens compared to foreign wives of Thai citizens, should be done by the Thai citizens themselves, if they agree that their constitutional rights are affected, not by their husbands through an expat organisation. The foreign husbands' constitutional rights are already being respected because they don't have any.

I should also add that some of the issues mentioned in this thread have been lobbied for by the Foreign Chamber of Commerce which was particularly active in campaigning against the more restrictive amendments that were proposed (but fortunately failed in the NLA) under the last military installed government. They have lobbied for a much faster and more transparent tracks to PR and citizenship for foreign investors and for an ID card for PRs that gives the right to work without a work permit and other rights short of voting rights. They have also argued for easier access to land. Admittedly they haven't made much headway on any of these issues to best of my knowledge but I do know that they keep on trying at every opportunity and will certainly make a case to the new government and via the Thai chambers and the BOI as well. Often the BOI takes up some of these issues and one day may actually made some progress. For those who are in business, lobbying through the foreign chambers is certainly appropriate.

[Arkady]

For those of you with Thai wives and interested in easier access to Thai citizenship, I think it is up to your wives to lobby for this. Foreign women with Thai husbands have a slightly easier route to citizenship in that they don't need to be working in Thailand but their husbands need to have taxable income instead. Under the 1997 and 2007 constitutions (and presumably under the next one) it was unconstitutional to discriminate against any Thai citizen on grounds of gender. A Thai women's group actually took the case of Thai citizenship to the Ombudsman in the early 2000s on the basis that the Nationality Act discriminated against Thai women by allowing the foreign wives of Thai men to apply with relatively easy conditions under Section 9, whereas the foreign husbands of Thai women had to apply under Section 10 with the same conditions as people not married to Thais. The Ombudsman took it to the Council of State (the government's legal advisory body) and the Council of State opined that the government was legally entitled on grounds of national security to impose more stringent conditions on foreign males married to Thai than vice versa (at that time foreign males married to Thais had no special privileges in applying for citizenship and had to obtain PR first and sing the royal and national anthems along with everyone else). Notwithstanding that opinion the case was again taken up by a female lawmaker in the military installed NLA under the Sarayud government in 2007 using the same grounds of discrimination against Thai women. As a lawmaker she was able to bypass the Ombudsman and Council of State and proposed a bill to the NLA which set out to amend the 1965 Nationality Act to eliminate the discrimination against Thai women as well as to definitively correct the far greater evils inflicted by Revolutionary Decree 337 of 13 December 1972 that had retroactively stripped Thai citizenship from persons born in Thailand to alien parents who didn’t both have PR at the time of their birth.

The bill of 2007 allowed foreign males married to Thai women to apply for citizenship under Section 9 with exactly the same conditions as foreign women married to Thai men, i.e. their wives would have needed taxed income of B20k for them to qualify. However, the bill was submitted to the Interior Ministry’s committee for legal affairs before being putting to the vote and the legal committee insisted, again on grounds of national security and in the interests of preserving Thailand’s Thai characteristics, that foreign men with Thai wives should not be able to apply under Section 9 in the same way as foreign women with Thai husbands. Instead they added Section 11.4 which gives exemption to husbands of women with Thai nationality from Section 10.4 which requires applicants to have had a residence in the Kingdom for 5 years (i.e. PR for 5 years); and Section 10.5 which requires applicants to have knowledge of the Thai language (i.e. they have to sing the royal and national anthems in front of the screening committee for nationality at the Interior Ministry). In its publicly posted minutes the legal committee argued that these concessions amounted to a very significant relaxation (as they do because you can bypass PR which nowadays takes years) and that there was no need to allow foreign men married to Thai women to apply under Section 9.

Knowing the history helps with an understanding of the mindset of the Interior Ministry officials who are entrusted with enforcing the Nationality Act. It also makes clear that progress has been made, even if Thailand is behind more developed nations. The blackest years for citizen rights were from 1972 to 1992 when significant numbers of minorities had their Thai citizenship removed and became stateless as did their children later. Children born in Thailand to Thai mothers and foreign fathers during that period were also not entitled to Thai nationality. That only changed in 1992 when the Act was amended to allow Thai nationality to pass through a Thai mother. I think the Interior Ministry officials probably feel satisfied with the progress made to date and don’t want to rush things too much. They are also no doubt still concerned with the perceived threat to national security and Thainess presented by what are now tens of thousands of foreign men living in Thailand with Thai wives. Since most of them are retirees barring them from applying under Section 9 is the only thing preventing a huge number of applications from foreign men, many of whom are farangs. As in the past, the vast majority of the women applying for citizenship under Section 9 are Chinese who will quietly blend into the Thai-Chinese community and present no threat in the eyes of the mainly Thai-Chinese mandarins at the ministry.

I am not saying here that I am either for or against the Act as it stands today or the ministry’s policies in interpreting and enforcing it. I am just sharing my insights from many years of studying the history of the legislation, the rules and their application and as having applied successfully for PR and having got through most of the hoops towards citizenship. My view is that the remaining discrimination against foreign males will eventually be rectified but that any lobby group of foreign males pushing for it will not be productive. It is only the rights under the constitution of their Thai wives that will count. So, if anyone is to lobby, it will have to be the Thai wives. However, it is most likely in my opinion that the law might be amended to even up the right of male and female foreign spouses by giving some more concessions to male spouses but taking some away from female spouses. This is what happened when Thai women were given the right to own land in 1999. Thai men previously had an absolute right to own land, regardless of who they were married to but now they have to make a declaration at the Land Department, if they have a foreign wife, in the same way that Thai women with foreign husbands have to. It is also possible that further concessions would only be forthcoming at the cost of more specific provisions against dual nationality that could harm Thai spouses with dual nationality. So it might be a case of be careful what you wish for.

[thailiketoo]

I think the membership of Thai visa includes the people and the experience to get something official put together. Hidden amidst the rabble.

I think this is a topic worthy of serious discussion.

If it takes three or four years so be it.

The Americans have had a treaty with Thailand since 1965 concerning equal rights for Thais in America and Americans in Thailand. The place to ask is your government not Thai Visa.

[canuckamuck]

I think the membership of Thai visa includes the people and the experience to get something official put together. Hidden amidst the rabble.

I think this is a topic worthy of serious discussion.

If it takes three or four years so be it.

The Americans have had a treaty with Thailand since 1965 concerning equal rights for Thais in America and Americans in Thailand. The place to ask is your government not Thai Visa.

I seriously doubt my country, Canada, is about to make the kind investment in military infrastructure that America did, to get special arrangements like that. Certainly not just for my benefit.

[Arkady]

For those of you interested in lobbying for the right to own land in your own name, this is an old chestnut. In 1999 in the wake of the devastating Tom Yam Kung crisis the ruling Democrat Party proposed a bill to amend the 1954 Land Code that was to allow: 1) foreigners to buy up to 1 rai of residential land in certain prescribed areas, if they invested B40 million in certain prescribed instruments (over and above the investment in the land and construction on it) ; and 2) foreigners married to Thai citizenships to buy up to 1 rai of residential land in certain areas without any financial requirements. The Democrats argued that these measures would speed the recovery of the real estate sector.

Debate raged in the House for several days over this bill. Many members felt the B40 million requirement and that up to 10 times that amount (in the money of the day) should be required to unlock the door to the crown jewels of Thai land ownership. But eventually that part of the bill passed into law. However, the proposal to allow land ownership to foreigners married to Thais got a much worse reception in the House which split the Democrat Party as its backbenchers sided with the opposition parties to block the bill. So that part of the bill had to be dropped and the issue has never been seriously proposed by any politician or bureaucrat since, whereas various crackdowns against foreign land ownership through nominees have been announced since 2006.

You can take a view on whether it is worth trying to resurrect this one. Unlike citizenship for husbands, it is hard to see what group of Thai citizens could lobby for this, since the Thai wives of foreign men have been allowed to buy land since 1999. Many Thais also resent the idea of going back to the days of the the “unequal treaties” that allowed foreigners to own land from the mid 1800s until the early 1970s. Personally I think it is more worthwhile getting trade organisations like the foreign chambers to lobby for longer than 30 year leases for everyone, including Thais. This is clearly an issue with the advent of the AEC, since most ASEAN countries allow leases of 50 to 70 leases and Thailand is probably the most restrictive in terms of foreign access to land.

[Thongkorn]

your Just a guest, and a paying Guest at that.

[thailiketoo]

I think the membership of Thai visa includes the people and the experience to get something official put together. Hidden amidst the rabble.

I think this is a topic worthy of serious discussion.

If it takes three or four years so be it.

The Americans have had a treaty with Thailand since 1965 concerning equal rights for Thais in America and Americans in Thailand. The place to ask is your government not Thai Visa.

I seriously doubt my country, Canada, is about to make the kind investment in military infrastructure that America did, to get special arrangements like that. Certainly not just for my benefit.

Actually it was more infrastructure, infrastructure like deep water ports, airports, schools, roads and communications. But you have a major advantage. Everybody likes Canadians even the Thai people I know like Canadians.

[benalibina]

The problem is that most foreigners have no balls and prefer to remain under the radar... invisible...

The problem is that expat clubs in Thailand have some members and leaders with some very dodgy backgrounds.......

Google is youre friend.

The other problem is, if some farangs get into their head to form a "people's front of Isaan" in Thailand and made too many rumblings demanding rights, they could find themselves without a place to live very quickly, this is the key point, a foreigner is permitted to stay on the whim of a goverment official, if you get up their noses too much, and if its deemed your in violation of the terms of your permission to stay then bye bye.

The only viable option to get "farang" representation in Thailand, is for the Thai wives of foreigners is to protest and petion the goverment for change, but the next question that would need to be asked is how many wives of farangs would actually do this ? or are they just content eating Somtam, watching the soaps and getting money and dont really give a rats whether their husbands have "rights" ?

Cynical comment, but true. Says enough.

[Kudel]

As far as the broader issue of expat groups is concerned I think there is no harm in having expat groups or even one big group. However, once they meet the criteria requiring registration as a non-profit organisation, they would need to be registered which is an onerous process that, in my experience, can take 2 or 3 years and may be more difficult to do without Thai directors. The objectives need to be approved by the Ministry of Commerce which might not approve a group that appears to be simply a pressure group pushing for rights of foreigners against the Thai government. Normally non-profit organisations are carefully vetted to ensure they are political organisations and directors need to register all their assets and be prepared to take responsibility in the event of any criminal or civil litigation against the organisation. If not registered as proper legal entity, like a chamber of commerce, it would not be an official organisation and there would be no reason for government officials to pay any attention to it as it would not be an organisation with any formal leadership or anyone willing to take responsibility for its statements and actions.

So why are certain links to website's run by people fighting the plight for foreigners being blocked on Thaivisa and so called dodgy company's run by foreigners allowed to do their bussensis on said site.

I was not making an official comment on behalf of Thai Visa. I was giving my personal views on what I think would be the legal situation. If you have issues with TV policies, please address Admin direct. I will add in another post that I believe that, if it is to be taken seriously, lobbying on specific issues like equal citizenship rights for foreign husbands of Thai citizens compared to foreign wives of Thai citizens, should be done by the Thai citizens themselves, if they agree that their constitutional rights are affected, not by their husbands through an expat organisation. The foreign husbands' constitutional rights are already being respected because they don't have any.

I should also add that some of the issues mentioned in this thread have been lobbied for by the Foreign Chamber of Commerce which was particularly active in campaigning against the more restrictive amendments that were proposed (but fortunately failed in the NLA) under the last military installed government. They have lobbied for a much faster and more transparent tracks to PR and citizenship for foreign investors and for an ID card for PRs that gives the right to work without a work permit and other rights short of voting rights. They have also argued for easier access to land. Admittedly they haven't made much headway on any of these issues to best of my knowledge but I do know that they keep on trying at every opportunity and will certainly make a case to the new government and via the Thai chambers and the BOI as well. Often the BOI takes up some of these issues and one day may actually made some progress. For those who are in business, lobbying through the foreign chambers is certainly appropriate.

People come to tv to seek advice and sometimes get the wrong end of the stick,if tv wants to be a guide or beacon and wants to hide behind certain rules or regulations when shit hits the fan let me tell you that certain things said or posted on the net are logged ,specially concerning some things advertisers claims.......

[Arkady]

I think the membership of Thai visa includes the people and the experience to get something official put together. Hidden amidst the rabble.

I think this is a topic worthy of serious discussion.

If it takes three or four years so be it.

The Americans have had a treaty with Thailand since 1965 concerning equal rights for Thais in America and Americans in Thailand. The place to ask is your government not Thai Visa.

Actually the 1965 American-Thai Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations was not a wonderful achievement for Americans. The main difference between it and its predecessor was that the previous treaty allowed Americans to own land in Thailand, provided that the US state they were from allowed Thais to buy land. The US government bought the argument that allowing foreign interests to accumulate land under the old treaties that all Western countries and some others, e.g. Japan and Indonesia, had with Thailand at the time would make it easier for the Communist Party of Thailand to recruit landless peasants to its cause, despite the strict size restrictions imposed on individual foreigners by the treaties. By that time the treaties that had been renegotiated several times since the mid 1800s and were no longer particularly unfair, since most rights, including land rights, were only given on a reciprocal basis. The US therefore meekly surrendered its citizens' rights to own land in Thailand and got nothing in return, except for the right to pump billions into the coffers of a corrupt military government and to finance massive drug dealing operations in the prosecution of a hopeless war. The other foreign powers were of no strategic or financial importance to Thailand at the time and in the wake of the US cave in, the other foreign treaties were all scrapped by the early 70s. You can still see in the Land Code the rights foreigners had under the treaties. It was actually unfair to the foreigners because they were restricted in the amount of Thai land they could own, whereas Thais could generally buy land without limit in their countries.

If anything, foreign governments should be pressed to restore the concept of reciprocity in land ownership rights (and business ownership rights). Thailand is no longer a poor third world country and Thai corporations and wealthy Thai individuals are now snapping up property and businesses all over the world. However, some countries have already re-introduced the doctrine of reciprocity which means that Thais are not allowed to own land in Turkey, Taiwan and Korea to name a few. Will larger Western countries follow suit? Probably not but, if something is worth lobbying for in land ownership rights (not including leasing rights here), this is it. Thai corporations need to get the sense that their land and business ownership rights overseas might be at further risk, if they don't lobby their own government to re-introduce reciprocity.

[Arkady]

As far as the broader issue of expat groups is concerned I think there is no harm in having expat groups or even one big group. However, once they meet the criteria requiring registration as a non-profit organisation, they would need to be registered which is an onerous process that, in my experience, can take 2 or 3 years and may be more difficult to do without Thai directors. The objectives need to be approved by the Ministry of Commerce which might not approve a group that appears to be simply a pressure group pushing for rights of foreigners against the Thai government. Normally non-profit organisations are carefully vetted to ensure they are political organisations and directors need to register all their assets and be prepared to take responsibility in the event of any criminal or civil litigation against the organisation. If not registered as proper legal entity, like a chamber of commerce, it would not be an official organisation and there would be no reason for government officials to pay any attention to it as it would not be an organisation with any formal leadership or anyone willing to take responsibility for its statements and actions.

So why are certain links to website's run by people fighting the plight for foreigners being blocked on Thaivisa and so called dodgy company's run by foreigners allowed to do their bussensis on said site.

I was not making an official comment on behalf of Thai Visa. I was giving my personal views on what I think would be the legal situation. If you have issues with TV policies, please address Admin direct. I will add in another post that I believe that, if it is to be taken seriously, lobbying on specific issues like equal citizenship rights for foreign husbands of Thai citizens compared to foreign wives of Thai citizens, should be done by the Thai citizens themselves, if they agree that their constitutional rights are affected, not by their husbands through an expat organisation. The foreign husbands' constitutional rights are already being respected because they don't have any.

I should also add that some of the issues mentioned in this thread have been lobbied for by the Foreign Chamber of Commerce which was particularly active in campaigning against the more restrictive amendments that were proposed (but fortunately failed in the NLA) under the last military installed government. They have lobbied for a much faster and more transparent tracks to PR and citizenship for foreign investors and for an ID card for PRs that gives the right to work without a work permit and other rights short of voting rights. They have also argued for easier access to land. Admittedly they haven't made much headway on any of these issues to best of my knowledge but I do know that they keep on trying at every opportunity and will certainly make a case to the new government and via the Thai chambers and the BOI as well. Often the BOI takes up some of these issues and one day may actually made some progress. For those who are in business, lobbying through the foreign chambers is certainly appropriate.

People come to tv to seek advice and sometimes get the wrong end of the stick,if tv wants to be a guide or beacon and wants to hide behind certain rules or regulations when shit hits the fan let me tell you that certain things said or posted on the net are logged ,specially concerning some things advertisers claims.......

No comment on that and please take up such issues with Admin, as mentioned before. Personally I have no axe to grind and have just spent my time to share my knowledge of some Thai laws and regulations and their historical background. If reading that free, unbiased advice is a problem to anyone, please don't read my posts.

[Arkady]

Just read this thread and have decided the best name for this lobby group should be:

Foreigners Asking for Rights in Thailand or FARTs for short.

This thread is perhaps a good answer for why such a group has never been, nor ever will be formed.

A good acronym. but, joking aside, many people are understandably frustrated and confused by some of these issues and it's good that TV provides a forum for open discussion about them, as well as clarifying issues like citizenship and land ownership. Many people with Thai wives still don't realise that they are actually qualified to apply for Thai citizenship, if they are working in Thailand, and that their Thai wives, since 1999, have been able to buy land without having to worry that they have taken their husbands' family names, for example.

Even though it has been a long and painful process, we have to acknowledge that all advancements on these issues have been achieved by lobbying (by appropriate groups), including citizenship for children of Thai mothers and foreign fathers, land ownership rights for Thai women with foreign husbands, the right for foreign husbands of Thai women to apply for citizenship without having PR first, and the right of minorities born in Thailand to alien parents to gain or reclaim Thai citizenship that was stripped from them. Without any lobbying we would still be at the status quo that prevailed after 1972 and prior to 1992.

[thailiketoo]

I think the membership of Thai visa includes the people and the experience to get something official put together. Hidden amidst the rabble.

I think this is a topic worthy of serious discussion.

If it takes three or four years so be it.

The Americans have had a treaty with Thailand since 1965 concerning equal rights for Thais in America and Americans in Thailand. The place to ask is your government not Thai Visa.

Actually the 1965 American-Thai Treaty of Amity and Economic Relations was not a wonderful achievement for Americans. The main difference between it and its predecessor was that the previous treaty allowed Americans to own land in Thailand, provided that the US state they were from allowed Thais to buy land. The US government bought the argument that allowing foreign interests to accumulate land under the old treaties that all Western countries and some others, e.g. Japan and Indonesia, had with Thailand at the time would make it easier for the Communist Party of Thailand to recruit landless peasants to its cause, despite the strict size restrictions imposed on individual foreigners by the treaties. By that time the treaties that had been renegotiated several times since the mid 1800s and were no longer particularly unfair, since most rights, including land rights, were only given on a reciprocal basis. The US therefore meekly surrendered its citizens' rights to own land in Thailand and got nothing in return, except for the right to pump billions into the coffers of a corrupt military government and to finance massive drug dealing operations in the prosecution of a hopeless war. The other foreign powers were of no strategic or financial importance to Thailand at the time and in the wake of the US cave in, the other foreign treaties were all scrapped by the early 70s. You can still see in the Land Code the rights foreigners had under the treaties. It was actually unfair to the foreigners because they were restricted in the amount of Thai land they could own, whereas Thais could generally buy land without limit in their countries.

If anything, foreign governments should be pressed to restore the concept of reciprocity in land ownership rights (and business ownership rights). Thailand is no longer a poor third world country and Thai corporations and wealthy Thai individuals are now snapping up property and businesses all over the world. However, some countries have already re-introduced the doctrine of reciprocity which means that Thais are not allowed to own land in Turkey, Taiwan and Korea to name a few. Will larger Western countries follow suit? Probably not but, if something is worth lobbying for in land ownership rights (not including leasing rights here), this is it. Thai corporations need to get the sense that their land and business ownership rights overseas might be at further risk, if they don't lobby their own government to re-introduce reciprocity.

Americans can own 100% of a business in Thailand. Americans got a gas dump, combat airfields and communications center during the Vietnam war. Did the war in Vietnam help Thailand avoid the fate of Laos, Cambodia, Burma and Vietnam? My unbiased opinion is; I don't know.

Edited August 24, 2014 by thailiketoo

[samran]

Just read this thread and have decided the best name for this lobby group should be:

Foreigners Asking for Rights in Thailand or FARTs for short.

This thread is perhaps a good answer for why such a group has never been, nor ever will be formed.

A good acronym. but, joking aside, many people are understandably frustrated and confused by some of these issues and it's good that TV provides a forum for open discussion about them, as well as clarifying issues like citizenship and land ownership. Many people with Thai wives still don't realise that they are actually qualified to apply for Thai citizenship, if they are working in Thailand, and that their Thai wives, since 1999, have been able to buy land without having to worry that they have taken their husbands' family names, for example.

Even though it has been a long and painful process, we have to acknowledge that all advancements on these issues have been achieved by lobbying (by appropriate groups), including citizenship for children of Thai mothers and foreign fathers, land ownership rights for Thai women with foreign husbands, the right for foreign husbands of Thai women to apply for citizenship without having PR first, and the right of minorities born in Thailand to alien parents to gain or reclaim Thai citizenship that was stripped from them. Without any lobbying we would still be at the status quo that prevailed after 1972 and prior to 1992.

Don't get me wrong, I've always thought that spouses especially should have a near automatic route to work rights, and then predictable route PR and then citizenship.

In the meantime there are two options.

Work within the rules. Plenty of people do that and though it isn't optimal it is the path of least residence for the moment. As you say, there should be more prominence given to the changes that have happened, to both show where things have come from and also to show some people that they are actually more qualified for the route to citizenship than they perhaps though. I certainly benefitted from this evolution of the laws via the 1992 changes.

The other side is the gentle lobbying effort. I deal with the Thai government a bit and to my mind there is no doubt that gentle pressure can be applied at different points of the civil service especially. It takes time however and I genuinely think that unless some dedicated stakeholders take a long term view of achieving this objective they might as well never bother.