webfact Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Note to Readers: Clarification on New Laws Curbing Alcohol Sales in ThailandKhaosod EnglishPolice question customers at a bar in Pathum Thani on 25 July 2015 that is within 300 meters of Rangsit University.From the EditorsBANGKOK: -- Last week the Thai government passed two separate legal measures restricting the sale of alcohol near educational institutions across the country. We would like to clarify the differences between the two measures, which have led to some confusion about the scope and definition of the new regulations.The first legal measure was an amendment to the 2008 Control of Alcoholic Beverage Act passed by the Office of Prime Minister on 22 July 2015.The amendment outlaws selling alcohol within 300 meters of the "fence" of universities and colleges, both public and private. Lower schools are not included in the ban.The amendment, which will come into effect 30 days after its publication, also exempts hotels, “entertainment zones,” and wholesale factories and distributors from the restriction. Currently, only Patpong district, and parts of New Petchburi Road and Ratchadapisek Road are considered entertainment zones in Bangkok.On the following day - 23 July 2015 - Gen. Prayuth Chan-ocha, the Prime Minister... [read more]Full story: http://www.khaosodenglish.com/detail.php?newsid=1437978181§ion=0200 -- Khaosod English 2015-07-27 RELATED: PM Prayut orders ban on alcohol sales near universities and vocational colleges RELATED: 2 Bars Closed Down Under Junta's Sweeping Booze Ban Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tywais Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Seems their definition of 'clarification' isn't the same as mine. Summary: 1st order states lower schools not included, 2nd order says they may be. <sigh> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just1Voice Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 In other words, just more nonsense confusion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misterwhisper Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 "Lower schools are not included in the ban..." ...because they cannot afford a proper fence? Just kidding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pinkpanther99 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Great. Well that's clear as day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellacissa Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Well, that's about as clear as any other news we get around here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBrilliant Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 I can't see any booze in the pic.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncat1 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 There is life outside of Bangkok, and it would be nice if the laws were made clearer for Big stores like Tesco Lotus and Big C where some of their stores are within the 300 metre zone. The exemption for lower schools is ridiculous. Lower school is M 1 to M 3 and some of those kids are quite big and drink. Also Male Thai teachers drink, so the ban should be for every school Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dotpoom Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Seems there definition of 'clarification' isn't the same as mine. Summary: 1st order states lower schools not included, 2nd order says they may be. <sigh> And, the first one says within "300 mtr....the 2nd. one says within the "vicinity"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cumgranosalum Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 "claification" - every time a dictum like this is followed by "clarification"...WHY?..... because they are ill-conceived ill-thought out and poorly organised and poorly executed - in fact just a load of nonsense that eventually will fall flat on it's face or fade into obsolescence.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NongKhaiKid Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Carefully thought through as usual. Quite a trick to sign a law and a separate order within 24 hours that contradict each other, someone was really on the ball with the drafting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catterwell Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Good clarification. Now we're clear about the lack of clarity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LatPhrao Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 The Prime Moaner, the"Bull in the China Cabinet" scores again with the awesome bazooka Article 44 blowing a hole in the local economy with yet another well thought out plan to bring happy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DP25 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 The amendment outlaws selling alcohol within 300 meters of the "fence" of universities and colleges, both public and private. That is an important clarification. Previously there had been various maps posted of new the prohibition zones, but they had all been based on single points, such as the entrance to a school, rather than 300m out from the entire perimeter of the school. This significantly enlarges the potential prohibition zone. It looks like they mean 300m out from any point on a school's property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobTH Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 I can't see any booze in the pic.... I wish they would have taken one of below the tables, I bet the glasses and bottles are all under there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sprq Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Laws are often badly written in Thailand, but at least when there's a parliament there's a chance for MPs to question and debate the drafts so as to iron out some of the nonsense, or vote the whole thing down. In the current situation, you have no checks and balances and authoritarian clowns can come up with senseless ideas which get turned into law willy-nilly. Only when the law is in place and they see the reactions do they actually start to think. Perhaps. Maybe. Just possibly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlQaholic Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) One would think that if there was a problem with alcohol and schools, a law like this would be justified. I have not read or heard about any such problem during all my time here in Thailand?? What is this thing really about? Like if there where hoards of drunken students stumbling around at Ramkanhaeng and Chula, I would think there was a problem. On the other hand that problem would soon solve itself as those hoards would soon fail in their studies and fail the exams, automatic exit from school and problem solved? Wait, I know what happened...Some guy high up in the (Junta) government caught his kid coming home after school a bit soggy, and decided it was everyone's else's fault but his, that's why this new law has come into existence.... Edited July 27, 2015 by AlQaholic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmccarty Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 I can't see any booze in the pic.... It's one of those no alcohol bars. The students just go there to text each other and get out of the sun! But see the kids raising their hands? The cops are asking, "Who wants a drink" Then pointing at the kids that raise their hands. Therefore, guilty! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DM07 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Oh dear! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sammygood Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 what about showing id card when buying ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisY1 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Another "order" from the junta.....who expect everyone to jump to attention at with a brisk..Yes sir! Unfortunately for these guys.......it's very difficult for them to understand that this is not a battalion they're running.....! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eeworldwide Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 New Petchburi Road and Ratchadapisek Road consist mainly of entertainment aimed at Thais? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eeworldwide Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Anyway - what we would really like to know is: Can the local 7/11 stores and Tescos etc sell if they are within a 300m vicinity Are lower schools completely exempt from the ban? If not why not How much of central sukhumvit will be affected - and if they ARE; does it mean that only hotels from say, On Nut - Siam are the only venues able to sell alcohol Please feel free to add more questions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Naroge Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 The "law"and the "order" both looks clear to me now, with one exception. ""Vicinity"needs to be explained. Once that is done it's just to follow both. The consequences for not abiding by these are however a different matter and will hopefully be clarified as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remaxtony Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 The only thing the second order "clarified" was the continued lack of clarity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
remaxtony Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) what about showing id card when buying ? This is the no brainer of the whole issue, ID cards or no serve,,,,,enforce that and you're done. The police could literally bust these joints weekly until they get it and comply. The only kink in that armor, is that Thais usually buy bottle service and all "share". So, one kid can get the bottle that is of age, and his friends all drink from it. So, the ID requirement would have to be one that you must have ID to get into the bar, not just buy the alcohol. This is difficult for most Thai Style joints that have food and alcohol and some music. But if they want to clean up the young drinkers, ID control is all that is required. Of course this won't stop them from drinking, it will just stop them from doing it at these joints near schools. Edited July 27, 2015 by remaxtony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NongKhaiKid Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 This whole issue is a complete cluster.... and add to it the two day religious holiday ban that in Phuket anyway is to include hotels.. Since things are supposed to go in threes I wonder what disaster the powers that be can dream up to complete the set ? No No No, I wish I hadn't said that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryro88 Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 (edited) Nothing has changed in Pattaya well. I've watched the police drive by bars and 7/11's close to schools all over the city. It will never take affect here. Edited July 27, 2015 by ryro88 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inepto Cracy Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 Let me spike the dyke so to speak. How does law apply to schools that have restaurants and coffee shops ON campus, that serve wine, beers and spirits? Well thought out plan. Maybe brought to you by the thinker of the great alcohol ban on selling between the hours of eleven O' clock and five PM? BUT you can buy between these times if you buy TWO or more of what you wanted in the first place. Failing that, walk into a mom and pop store and buy what you like, even on religious and no drink allowed to be consumed or drunk, holidays. Wow the think tank must be getting hot with all those thought waves generating heat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAG Posted July 27, 2015 Share Posted July 27, 2015 From the point of view of the enforcers, be they wearing brown or green, it is a well thought out law. It is vague enough to allow for a whole range of "informal taxes". I doubt whether the aim is to put establishments out of business, that would kill the goose that lays the golden egg, rather to open up a whole new income stream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now