Urgently Seeking Advice...

[lostinisaan]

Hello and Sawasdee khrap,

My Filipino colleague, married with three children aged 4, 8 and 12 years old, all holding a Filipino passport seem to have some bigger problems.

Both work as English teachers and have been here in Thailand for six years. The youngest daughter ( 4) was born here, but none of his kids ever had a Thai visa.

Both are on Non-B visas with work permits/

I know that it might sound strange to some of you, but that's the situation they're in now.

It seems that they've already tried the local Immigration who said they couldn't help them.

Can kids be on an overstay? Would they receive a visa for their kids in Sawannakhet?

Any useful replies would be deeply appreciated and thanks a lot in advance.

[mallet36]

As far as I know there is no overstay fines for children under 15 and they can obtain a non O ( dependent visa ) from Laos.

[ubonjoe]

If they are on extensions of stay their children can get extensions as their dependents. They would first need to get single entry non-o visas from a nearby embassy or consulate.

The child born here can stay until they leave here, They will need their birth certificate and passport when the leaving the country. The others will not be fined for an overstay since they are under the age of 15 but will get overstay stamps.

To get the non-o visas they will need copies of either of the parents passport photo page, extension of stay stamps and the children birth certificates.

[BritTim]

Some things I think I know:

• If born in Thailand, they do not need a visa, and are not considered to be on overstay until they leave.
• If a child enters Thailand, and then overstays, penalties are waived up to the age iirc of 15 (and no blacklist under 18). However, the lack of a current visa is a technical offense.
• They should be able to get extensions for their kids if they themselves have extensions of stay based on working.

[lostinisaan]

Some things I think I know:

• If born in Thailand, they do not need a visa, and are not considered to be on overstay until they leave.
• If a child enters Thailand, and then overstays, penalties are waived up to the age iirc of 15 (and no blacklist under 18). However, the lack of a current visa is a technical offense.
• They should be able to get extensions for their kids if they themselves have extensions of stay based on working.

Thanks a,lot for your nice reply. Khup Khun Maak, Khraap.-

[lostinisaan]

If they are on extensions of stay their children can get extensions as their dependents. They would first need to get single entry non-o visas from a nearby embassy or consulate.

The child born here can stay until they leave here, They will need their birth certificate and passport when the leaving the country. The others will not be fined for an overstay since they are under the age of 15 but will get overstay stamps.

To get the non-o visas they will need copies of either of the parents passport photo page, extension of stay stamps and the children birth certificates.

"Hey Joe,

Where do you go with the keyboard in your hand" ? Just wanted to thank you very much for the very cool and informative answer.-

Edited March 25, 2016 by lostinisaan

[lkv]

What I don't understand is why would parents bother spending money to get a 4 year old on a non O visa( that costs money), travelling expense for the whole family (the 4 year old is not going to travel by himself to Vientiane and go queue at the Thai Embassy at 8AM) etc, etc, when there is no repercussion nor any penalty?

Or all the kids for that matter? Just so they pay more money for visas and extensions every year, having to interact with Immi on a regular basis and on top of that exposing their kids to the risk that some dodgy IO says there is "some document missing" at their annual extension?

I mean seriously? What for?

Edited March 25, 2016 by lkv

[BritTim]

What I don't understand is why would parents bother spending money to get a 4 year old on a non O visa( that costs money), travelling expense for the whole family (the 4 year old is not going to travel by himself to Vientiane and go queue at the Thai Embassy at 8AM) etc, etc, when there is no repercussion nor any penalty?

Or all the kids for that matter? Just so they pay more money for visas and extensions every year, having to interact with Immi on a regular basis and on top of that exposing their kids to the risk that some dodgy IO says there is "some document missing" at their annual extension?

I mean seriously? What for?

Some people are averse to breaking the law, even when penalties are waived. If it were me, I would not bother making the kids legal until they reach 15. However, there could be a small risk of the technical offense being used against the parents in the future if they upset the wrong people. I am sure you could find members on here that would claim it outrageous that the Thai immigration laws be deliberately flouted, and consider that the parents should be heavily fined and blacklisted for such scurrilous behavior.

[ubonjoe]

What I don't understand is why would parents bother spending money to get a 4 year old on a non O visa( that costs money), travelling expense for the whole family (the 4 year old is not going to travel by himself to Vientiane and go queue at the Thai Embassy at 8AM) etc, etc, when there is no repercussion nor any penalty?

Or all the kids for that matter? Just so they pay more money for visas and extensions every year, having to interact with Immi on a regular basis and on top of that exposing their kids to the risk that some dodgy IO says there is "some document missing" at their annual extension?

I mean seriously? What for?

The 4 year old is the only child that is legally in the country. There may a point in time they will leave the country and re-enter which then put them under the requirements to maintain a legal stay in the country.

Just because there is no overstay fine does not mean the children are legally in the country. They still get overstay stamps when leaving. Although not likely to happen if they were caught with an overstay by the authorities they could be deported for being on an overstay.

There can also be other complications from not having a valid permit to stay in the country. For example there have been reports of problems enrolling children in school because of it.

[lostinisaan]

What I don't understand is why would parents bother spending money to get a 4 year old on a non O visa( that costs money), travelling expense for the whole family (the 4 year old is not going to travel by himself to Vientiane and go queue at the Thai Embassy at 8AM) etc, etc, when there is no repercussion nor any penalty?

Or all the kids for that matter? Just so they pay more money for visas and extensions every year, having to interact with Immi on a regular basis and on top of that exposing their kids to the risk that some dodgy IO says there is "some document missing" at their annual extension?

I mean seriously? What for?

The 4 year old is the only child that is legally in the country. There may a point in time they will leave the country and re-enter which then put them under the requirements to maintain a legal stay in the country.

Just because there is no overstay fine does not mean the children are legally in the country. They still get overstay stamps when leaving. Although not likely to happen if they were caught with an overstay by the authorities they could be deported for being on an overstay.

There can also be other complications from not having a valid permit to stay in the country. For example there have been reports of problems enrolling children in school because of it.

Thanks a lot for your post. It's possible that one reason "to get them legal" is that the oldest one just finished Prathomsuksa six and they wanted to get him into another school. The eight and 12 year old boys were studying at the school where daddy is working.

But the school is in a small town and I guess anybody can "study" there. But schools in bigger provinces would of course check the visa status of a student who's holding a Filipino passport.

He told me that he's planning to send the two boys to a school in a neighboring province, where his wife is working.

I would do all to make them legal, nobody really knows what the good soldier and his cohorts are planning to do sooner, or later.

Have a great weekend.

[lostinisaan]

What I don't understand is why would parents bother spending money to get a 4 year old on a non O visa( that costs money), travelling expense for the whole family (the 4 year old is not going to travel by himself to Vientiane and go queue at the Thai Embassy at 8AM) etc, etc, when there is no repercussion nor any penalty?

Or all the kids for that matter? Just so they pay more money for visas and extensions every year, having to interact with Immi on a regular basis and on top of that exposing their kids to the risk that some dodgy IO says there is "some document missing" at their annual extension?

I mean seriously? What for?

You're making some good and valid points. IMHO, there's an easy answer. To keep them legal.

Would there be a problem with the Immigration, at least one of the parents would have to leave Thailand with him, or probably them?

Of course should the in Thailand born daughter have more rights than the two boys and receive a Thai passport.

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

[chrisinth]

What I don't understand is why would parents bother spending money to get a 4 year old on a non O visa( that costs money), travelling expense for the whole family (the 4 year old is not going to travel by himself to Vientiane and go queue at the Thai Embassy at 8AM) etc, etc, when there is no repercussion nor any penalty?

Or all the kids for that matter? Just so they pay more money for visas and extensions every year, having to interact with Immi on a regular basis and on top of that exposing their kids to the risk that some dodgy IO says there is "some document missing" at their annual extension?

I mean seriously? What for?

You're making some good and valid points. IMHO, there's an easy answer. To keep them legal.

Would there be a problem with the Immigration, at least one of the parents would have to leave Thailand with him, or probably them?

Of course should the in Thailand born daughter have more rights than the two boys and receive a Thai passport.

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

Why would she be able to receive a Thai passport with two foreign parents?

I believe that ended a couple of decades ago. May be wrong though...........................

[BritTim]

Why would she be able to receive a Thai passport with two foreign parents?

I believe that ended a couple of decades ago. May be wrong though...........................

Actually, 20 years ago, even a child born in Thailand of a Thai mother but foreign father could not claim Thai nationality!

You are correct that two foreign parents excludes a Thai passport, the exception being if the parents have PR status in Thailand.

[chrisinth]

Why would she be able to receive a Thai passport with two foreign parents?

I believe that ended a couple of decades ago. May be wrong though...........................

Actually, 20 years ago, even a child born in Thailand of a Thai mother but foreign father could not claim Thai nationality!

You are correct that two foreign parents excludes a Thai passport, the exception being if the parents have PR status in Thailand.

My apologies, I don't believe i stated 20 years, this only brings us back to 1996! How time flies, i would have been closer saying 40 years ago or 44 to be exact.

Thailand followed Jus soli (1956 Nationality Act), meaning 'right of the soil', is the right of anyone born in the territory of a state to nationality or citizenship. This is one of the reasons why there is such a large Indian & Chinese influence, even today in Thailand, and the main reason it was stopped in 1972. The below extract (even though it is from Wiki) explains it:

"The first Thai Nationality Act of 1913 and most subsequent acts have included the principle of jus soli, though at times with various restrictions. The 1952 Nationality Act rescinded the 1913 Act's provisions for jus soli, in response to concerns over the integration of the children of Chinese immigrants, but unlimited jus soli was restored just four years later by the 1956 Nationality Act. In 1972, due to illegal immigration from Burma and concerns over communist insurgency in border areas, the Nationality Act was amended to require that both parents be legally resident and domiciled in Thailand for at least five years in order for their child to be granted Thai citizenship at birth, and revoked citizenship from many people who had it under the earlier Act. This caused difficulties for members of hill tribes in border areas who were not registered in the 1956 Census, since they had no way to prove that their parents were Thai as opposed to having entered the country as refugees".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_nationality_law

As to your point about a child born in Thailand of a Thai mother but a foreign father not being able to claim Thai nationality? Unless there were exceptional circumstances involved, i find that very difficult to imagine. i was here then, and all the luk kruengs that i knew from friends relationships had Thai nationality without exception.

[BritTim]

My apologies, I don't believe i stated 20 years, this only brings us back to 1996! How time flies, i would have been closer saying 40 years ago or 44 to be exact.

Thailand followed Jus soli (1956 Nationality Act), meaning 'right of the soil', is the right of anyone born in the territory of a state to nationality or citizenship. This is one of the reasons why there is such a large Indian & Chinese influence, even today in Thailand, and the main reason it was stopped in 1972. The below extract (even though it is from Wiki) explains it:

"The first Thai Nationality Act of 1913 and most subsequent acts have included the principle of jus soli, though at times with various restrictions. The 1952 Nationality Act rescinded the 1913 Act's provisions for jus soli, in response to concerns over the integration of the children of Chinese immigrants, but unlimited jus soli was restored just four years later by the 1956 Nationality Act. In 1972, due to illegal immigration from Burma and concerns over communist insurgency in border areas, the Nationality Act was amended to require that both parents be legally resident and domiciled in Thailand for at least five years in order for their child to be granted Thai citizenship at birth, and revoked citizenship from many people who had it under the earlier Act. This caused difficulties for members of hill tribes in border areas who were not registered in the 1956 Census, since they had no way to prove that their parents were Thai as opposed to having entered the country as refugees".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thai_nationality_law

As to your point about a child born in Thailand of a Thai mother but a foreign father not being able to claim Thai nationality? Unless there were exceptional circumstances involved, i find that very difficult to imagine. i was here then, and all the luk kruengs that i knew from friends relationships had Thai nationality without exception.

I am also guilty of underestimating the passage of time!

The right of a Thai mother to confer Thai nationality on her child occurred as a result of the Amendment to the Nationality Law in 1992. I cannot find the unamended version, but you can find references to things like

... This Act was amended by the Nationality Act of 1992 (version 2). Thai nationality is now conferred to a child who has either a Thai mother or father. Article 7 is applicable to all persons born between 5 August 1965 and 25 February 1992.

The sexist nature of Thai's nationality laws prior to 1992 was not restricted to this country. Many countries in South and South East Asia had discriminatory laws at that time.

EDIT: here is something better from Globalization and Citizenship in the Asia Pacific:

Edited March 26, 2016 by BritTim