178 Days stay Thailand

[phuketjock]

8 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

This is a constant threat of the nature of power, which must be checked by proper supervision and adherence to law.  Being right does not always mean "you win" in a power-game.  Does that mean we should abandon law, and just go with who has more firepower in every situation?  Should that be celebrated?  I do agree it must be recognized as a threat, and conflict avoided whenever possible.  In this case - many would be advised: don't fly in.

 

First, Thai immigration law is not written they way as described by "mvdf" - and each country makes its own laws.  The Thais can change theirs in the future if they choose.  See my post here on why cheering for a 'crackdown' which warps laws is foolish - even if you agree with the objective/goal:
https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/993006-a-thank-you-to-thailand-immigration/?do=findComment&comment=12094544

 

Anyone who thinks "being asian" makes it harder to enter the USA or Europe is deluded.  Asian people are the highest-performing demographic in the USA, in education, financially, lowest-crime rates, etc.  If anything, not "being white" means you will get easier treatment, because of the fear of a racism charge.  When white people get the shaft, no one makes a news-story about 'racism' - we just get shafted, quietly.  Money is the only real 'privilege' factor; with that, you can go anywhere - and even buy a passport that is less-scrutinized.  But, if your country of origin has low-wages - yes, you may be suspected of traveling to a higher-wage nation for illegal employment. 

 

Setting aside national security concerns, the reason countries have different policies, is primarily because of people entering some for reasons of obtaining illegal employment.  In the case of those entering Thailand, people whose passport-country offers lower wages than are available in Thailand - people from poorer nations.  There is a defined list of countries in this group, whose citizens Cannot Obtain Visas in Vientiane, Penang, etc (there is a list of them).

Jack I am sorry your posts get longer each time I get fed up after the first few lines.

I did not post to entice argument merely to show a different point of view as i said

in the previous post to yours " Some food for thought " nothing more.

You sound like you were once a politician or lawyer before Thailand??

 

Edited July 18, 2017 by phuketjock

[Mattd]

I think the point is that should the IO have a suspicion, or just plain doesn't like the person, then he will find one of the reasons in section 12 for denial of entry, instances of this have been posted here in the last few days, popular one being not enough funds, as if it were just that, then they would allow them to go and get the money.

Immigration even seem to have a stamp saying 'suspicion of working illegally' or words to that affect, not the official reason given for denial, but it certainly is just a nice 'friendly' note for the next IO they come across, who may well find / use another excuse from section 12, as the money one will have been covered.

Basically, if they really do not want that person to enter, then they will find a way to deny and there seems to be little that can be done once that happens.

[JackThompson]

11 minutes ago, phuketjock said:

Jack I am sorry your posts get longer each time I get fed up after the first few lines.

I did not post to entice argument merely to show a different point of view as i said

in the previous post to yours " Some food for thought " nothing more.

You sound like you were once a politician or lawyer before Thailand??

Not either - but read vociferously - including the footnotes and what they reference.  Please don't take my replies as personal - not intended that way. 

[BritTim]

1 hour ago, phuketjock said:

13 hours ago, BritTim said:

I have  researched this myself (unlike you who assumes Thai I immigration law, as written, must be the same as US immigration law). In total, the Immigration Act of 1979 has 92 Sections. I have read all of them multiple times, as much BS on the subject is cited all over the place. Let's see if anyone can cite an actual Thai law that gives immigration officials the right to deny entry other than according to Section 12. Only one person is given the authority to deny entry arbitrarily, and that is the Minister. Further, the law implies that anyone should be able to appeal denial of entry, and prescribes the procedure to be followed. Nowhere are any conditions stated within the law where officials are allowed to prevent the appeal.

I urge you to tell an IO who refuses you entry that he cannot do that then come on here and tell us all about it.

Some food for thought taken from another thread on a similar subject.

Written by mvdf in reply to a post by Jack Thompson.

 

" I'm struggling to understand why you and others on this forum WONDER why IOs behave in a manner you deem inappropriate! 

 

I am Asian and when I travel to Schengen countries, the U.S., Australia etc I am occasionally interrogated, my travel history scrutinised, itinerary analysed...

 

Why is it that you think or expect westerners to be treated preferentially, kowtowed even, just because you come from first world countries? Immigration authorities in this region are entitled to interrogate, analyse, admit or expel, scrutinise all arriving human beings at ports of entry in the same exact manner we Asians are treated when we arrive at your airports! "

 

I wholeheartedly agree with the above.

I am not very good at dropping pointless arguments. I allowed your last reply to pass, but I will briefly respond to this one.

 

I would never be so stupid as to challenge an immigration official's ability to make my life miserable. I agree Thai immigration officials do sometimes arbitrarily exclude people from the country, allowing no appeal. The point I tried to make (which no one has properly debunked) is that, under Thai law, they do not have the legal right to do so. They exclude people in the manner of a banana republic by preventing the law from being followed.

 

I am sorry, but I do not find the argument about what happens in other countries to have any bearing on Thai immigration law. At no place does that law defer to practice (however common) in other countries.

[phuketjock]

17 minutes ago, BritTim said:

I am not very good at dropping pointless arguments. I allowed your last reply to pass, but I will briefly respond to this one.

 

I would never be so stupid as to challenge an immigration official's ability to make my life miserable. I agree Thai immigration officials do sometimes arbitrarily exclude people from the country, allowing no appeal. The point I tried to make (which no one has properly debunked) is that, under Thai law, they do not have the legal right to do so. They exclude people in the manner of a banana republic by preventing the law from being followed.

 

I am sorry, but I do not find the argument about what happens in other countries to have any bearing on Thai immigration law. At no place does that law defer to practice (however common) in other countries.

Tim There are multiple laws in Thailand that are continually ignored on a daily basis, often by the very law enforcers themselves

You may or may not be correct in your summation of Thai immigration law but it doesn't really matter does it?

I notice UJ is keeping very quiet on this but I think I recall on more than one occasion he has said that an IO has the power to

refuse or admit anyone as he sees fit, i am open to correction on that.