SURVEY: Do you believe the police have the right to hold a person's passport?

[Scott]

Do you believe the police have the right to hold a persons passport, even if it is for an alleged minor offense?

Please feel free to leave a comment.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/892825-passport-control-phuket-police-confirm-will-hold-passports-as-they-see-fit/

[Suradit69]

...even if it is for an alleged minor offense?

Not really a fair choice when you throw in "minor offense."

Better to have asked if they ever have the right or never have the right. Then add a third option to include even for minor offenses if needed.

[X pat]

I have always been told it is a violation of international law to hold a persons passport that only the goverment that you got the passport from has the right to take it. Please corect me if I am wrong.

[Scott]

The reason for bringing up minor offenses, is because I think it is a slightly different situation is someone has been involved in a serious criminal offense. In those cases, I would assume that the person would be detained pending further legal action, or allowed out on bail.

If there are relatively minor damages involved and the police take your passport, you could end up overstaying your visa, missing a flight home and other consequences.

It's hard to say what constitutes a 'minor' offense, but that's something that might be worth discussing.

[Credo]

IMO, I don't think the police should hold a passport unless the person has committed a serious offense, such as a felony. If they can or should be arrested and must post bail and appear for a criminal offense, then the police should be allowed to hold the passport.

I would generally assume the home country embassy would be involved in situations like that, though.

[mojorison]

They are breaking international law by doing so.

[steven100]

The survey questions are not adequately defined ....

It doesn't really have anything to do with ' minor offense ' ... it's more concerning if your a convicted criminal.

In a simple answer ..... yes .. They should be able to hold your passport, if you are considered a suspect person with criminal intent or they have or are investigating an offence that you may be involved.

If you are clean and have no record .... then it won't be a problem ...

[khwaibah]

Makes no difference to what we think. This is a police state.

[NongKhaiKid]

This is something that foreign embassies should be getting into the Foreign Ministry about since our passports are the property of the government that issued them although since when did LoS worry about what others think ?

In the jurisdictions I have worked passports could be ordered surrendered but only by a court. I have no idea how that works here and if the same would the BIB comply or find an accommodation to get around it ?

I would suggest diplomatic pressure is most definitely needed before this gets out of hand a la all the complaints about testing foreigners etc in the Lumpini area.

[SOUTHERNSTAR]

If the person have been charged with a crimminal offence yes. If no charges have been laid the police can under Thai law detain such a person untill charges can be brought against him/her, no need to take a passport. If the offence is non-crimminal of nature, the claimant must obtain a court interdict/order for the confiscation of the defendant's passport.

[jpinx]

If anyone insists on taking my passport for more than reading and copying it, I will report it as lost to the local police, get a report, file a complaint, report it to my embassy, and post umpteen time to TV

Reason -- it's not "mine" ....

[harrry]

A little awkward this post.

They should maybe have a right to hod a passport for a mazimum of 12 hours until a court decides but this means that it is only for offences not a bill etc.

[RIJoe]

One comment, "If you are clean and have no record .... then it won't be a problem ... " strikes me as incredibly naive. Prisons are populated by many innocent people.

[Hawk]

What I believe in no longer matters because the police can do anything they want.

[TheKnave]

Passports are the property of the issuing government. Period. They should be seized by NO LEGITIMATE THIRD PARTY. The Thai government, Army, police or motorcycle vendor can not legally retain them. Being stupid enough to voluntarily surrender one does not legitamatize its seizure.

But, have a look around you. Where are you? That's right...

[z42]

If the crime is considered serious, and a lengthly investigation is necessary, then a representative from the passport's issuing country should be required as a counter signatory for its handing over, or they should take custody of it until the investigation is completed.

The cops simply withholding it and essentially playing by their own made up / ambiguous rules is hardly the actions of a reputable organization. A trusted & independent intermediary / 3rd party should provide assistance in instances like this imo

[Rockhopper]

Cannot answer due to lack of adequate informational questions.

[hawker9000]

The survey questions are not adequately defined ....

It doesn't really have anything to do with ' minor offense ' ... it's more concerning if your a convicted criminal.

In a simple answer ..... yes .. They should be able to hold your passport, if you are considered a suspect person with criminal intent or they have or are investigating an offence that you may be involved.

If you are clean and have no record .... then it won't be a problem ...

It's a simple answer. No. As Scott mentioned, if involved in some major offense, you're already in custody or out on bail. If a minor offense, the police already have the means to prevent your departure at any check point and holding the passport is not only unnecessary, it's disproportionate to the level of offense. In both cases, the passport is the primary means of identification and needed by the foreigner day-to-day. To take the passport actually imposes an unnecessary hardship.

And it's worth mentioning that the ability to take it raises yet another extortion opportunity for police.

There's a REASON why passport confiscation is considered a violation of int'l law.

[Shaunduhpostman]

What we believe or anyone believes is besides the point. What is the law?

What is Thailand's responsibility as per international agreements?

Also, do the various countries who issue passports consider it a serious matter or not if police hold passports. The passports belong to the various govrnments who issue them so thy are the ones who should be looking after matters.

[harrry]

I believe no one has the right to withold or even refuse to issue a passport. It is a certificate of identity that says you are a citizen of a country. Whether some other country accepts it is up to them. I feel I have the right to go where I like when I like within the law.

they should be able to stop at the border but they should not be able to hold or refuse a passport.

[F4UCorsair]

I have always been told it is a violation of international law to hold a persons passport that only the goverment that you got the passport from has the right to take it. Please corect me if I am wrong.

Courts in Australia regularly order the forfeiture of a passport to prevent the accused absconding overseas., so I guess that's incorrect.

However, police in Oz cannot confiscate a passport, so maybe you're partly correct??

[Xonax]

YES - if the purpose is to prevent a criminal offender from leaving the country.

[johndudorn]

They are breaking international law by doing so.

In the US I have seen many times that the court will take your passport if flight is a risk... Usually if you have the funds to do so and it is a major offense...

[Alwyn]

Yes if an offence has been committed and the person is a flight risk. No if it's being held to sort private issues as is mostly the case.

[sunnyjim5]

They are breaking international law by doing so.

Which "International Law" do you allege is being broken

Where can this law be found ?

[Credo]

They are breaking international law by doing so.

In the US I have seen many times that the court will take your passport if flight is a risk... Usually if you have the funds to do so and it is a major offense...

The court is a part of the gov't of the US and the gov't has the right to take your passport or to invalidate it. It is also taken by a Court, not by the police. It does not restrict the movement of US citizens around the US, it only prevents them from leaving the country.

Removing the passport of a foreigner is a whole different ball game.

[lonewolf99]

If any one from the UK has any doubts about this question - Please read the details listed as Notes on the back page - Section 7.

"This passport remains the property of Her Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom and may be withdrawn at any time. It should not be tampered with or passed to an unauthorised person.Tampering with a passport may constitute a criminal offence and rendered it invalid for use. Any case of loss or destruction should be reported to the local police and a British passport issuing authority......"

As far as I am concerned, if I have not commited a crime there is no need to hand a passport over to the local police. The only authorised person would be an Immigration officer and he would only have it for the time it takes him to verify that I am the bearer of that passport.

I would however hand a driving licence over to a real police man ? to verify who I am. But that would only happen in another country that has real ones.

Edited February 7, 2016 by lonewolf99

[Doc46]

No , I Don't think they are allowed to , But hey they don't care about anything they do what they want ,,,,This is Thailand even when they are wrong they are still right,,,,

[scorecard]

...even if it is for an alleged minor offense?

Not really a fair choice when you throw in "minor offense."

Better to have asked if they ever have the right or never have the right. Then add a third option to include even for minor offenses if needed.

Why not get some real and specific legal advice about the question, the poll is sure to bring a

They are breaking international law by doing so.

You wrote in a style that's it's an absolute fact.

Is it absolute fact?

Does international law even cover this subject in such a specific manner?

[sawadee1947]

right or not....they do. And I strongly believe they have the right as every police in our countries. The reasons to hold the passport might be different but that is not the point.

So the discussion is useless at the end.

If you BELIEVE the police does not have the right....what would you tell them or do if they request...? I suppose....NOTHING