Thailand’s Authorities threaten tsunami aid workers with 3 years jail.
Foreigners told to get work permits or face prison.
By Garry Harbottle-Johnson

THAILAND: 8 Feb 2005 – Just two days after Thai Rak Thai was returned to power in the general election, Sayan Chuaiyjan, Head of Phuket Provincial Employment Service has announced that foreign tsunami-aid workers must obtain Thai Work Permits, or face a maximum penalty of three years in jail, a 30,000 Baht fine, or both.

Enforcement will begin in March with no exceptions.

Admitting authorities didn’t enforce the law rigidly immediately after the tsunami, “because everyone wanted to help”, he added, “But now that the situation is returning to normal, we will have to start taking it more seriously.”

This announcement, coming immediately after the general election, has been criticised as timed to avoid losing votes for Thai Rak Thai in the tsunami affected southern provinces.

Mr Chuaiyjan’s comments appear to stem from application of Thailand’s 1978 “Working of Aliens Act” which defines “work” as “to engage in work by exerting energy or using knowledge whether or not in consideration of wages or other benefit”.

The Labour Head seems to be applying Section 7 of the Act.  It states, “to engage in work which is of necessity and urgency, for a period not longer than fifteen days, but such alien may engage in the work only after he has notified the Director-General, or official entrusted by the Director-General, in writing in the form prescribed by the Director–General.”

Section 7 is subject to Section 9, which adds, “the Director-General, or official entrusted by the Director-General, may prescribe any condition therein for the alien to comply therewith.”

Reactions, amongst Thailand’s 250,000+ non-Asian expatriates, were divided after the announcement.

Expatriate Internet forums displayed roughly 60% of comments being in favour of enforcing Thailand’s laws.  Most of the supportive comments were from foreign business investors who had complied with the complex regulations, and appeared to have donated to the relief effort, but not physically assisted personally.  Foreign-employer sponsored workers also tended to support it.

“My secretary has been getting my work permit annually for ten years now.  It’s not a hassle” wrote one businessman.

Decrying the announcement were mainly those expatriates who had or were still personally assisting on the ground.  They cited adages such as “biting the hand that feeds”, and called for clarification as to whether the aid workers (or their charities) would have to pay for the work permits.  Many also asked how tourists offering ad-hoc assistance could be entitled to work permits having entered the kingdom on the wrong types of visa.

“If I fund my Thai wife’s family rebuilding their house, do I now need a work permit?” asked one returnee on a tourist visa, “Because that’s what they seem to be saying.”

Within 24 hours of the announcement being first reported, direct quotes from it had been posted to Internet forums around the world, and a small but growing number of people announced cancellation of planned holidays on Thailand’s Andaman coast because of the tone of Khun Sayan’s threats.  If those cancellations turn into reality, his words may have a longer lasting effect on Thai tourism’s international goodwill, than the sympathy inducing tsunami itself.

Many derogatory comments included comparisons with procedures for Thais going to western countries to assist after natural disasters.  However, hypothetical examples of Thais doing so are invalid.

US East Coast hurricanes, and the massive flooding in the EC countries a year or so back, or even this winter’s extensive flooding in England’s northwest created similar amounts of collateral damage, but were recovered from individual’s insurance or their governments, and were rectified internally to the countries affected.

Those countries did not need foreign aid, or overseas labour and expertise, because it already existed within them, and their economies were strong enough to recover.  Additionally, they also had both efficient warning systems and disaster-recovery plans in place, thus minimising casualties and fatalities.

Thailand’s PM, Thaksin Shinawatra, for whatever reason, initially refused foreign aid claiming Thailand had enough resources to handle both the financial and manpower side of the relief effort.  Superficially, that was true, and as the kingdom moves into the rebuilding phase, shortages of experts are being exposed and the PM is learning that his blanket statement of “no help needed” is not quite true.

That is why Thailand called for forensic scientists to help with corpse identification.  It is hoped that “Aid” workers at that level have their paperwork completed free by a “Thai Rak Farang” government.  The annual work permit fee of 3,000 Baht is only just below the nation’s average monthly salary.

Khun Sayan stated that those working for recognised charitable organizations would find work permits easy to obtain, “They can just present a document certified by the charity organization they work for, and we will issue them with work permits, then they will be able to work legally,” he said.  He didn’t mention if salaried workers would be taxed in Thailand after receiving the work permit, or if aid workers would be asked to correct their visa type.

Such an offer could contravene the 1978 Act, and the application procedures for a work permit.  According to the Act, only the Minister can change the procedures and if Khun Sayan does so, he may himself be breaking the law.

Section 16 of the Act states, “The Minister has the power to issue Ministerial Regulations prescribing forms, rules and procedures in the following cases: (1) Application for an issue of permit under section 7 .…”  Therefore, it appears to indicate that someone on Phuket has exceeded their authority by an offer of making the permits “easy to obtain”.

The punishments in the announcement may also be in contravention of section 34 of the Act, which states, “Any alien who is working in violation of section 7 …shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or to a fine not exceeding five thousand Baht or to both.”

Phuket’s Employment Services have been criticised before for unilateral amendment of work permit regulations.  Only 8 months ago, they added caveats to the new “minimum taxable salary for visa” rules, which had just come into force.

Citing Section 9 of the 1978 Act, they added to the official wording (concerning foreign journalists and correspondents), that this applied only to newspaper employees, and that magazine and broadcasting correspondents had to abide by the minimum taxable incomes by nationality, resulting in minimum taxable salaries up to three times higher than the stated minimum for journalists.  The localised amendment was heavily criticised as usury and abuse of authority.

However, those changes to minimum taxable salaries by nationality, do not apply to state-employed foreigners such as teachers.  Those double standards have also been widely criticised by international groups and led to allegations from expatriates that the Thai Rak Thai government are intent on either, “raping foreigner’s wallets”, or aimed at, “chasing foreign business investors out of Thailand”.  Those allegations have resurfaced with February’s announcement from Phuket.

Nationally, residents with long memories state that all of these policy changes, and re-introductions, are tools for achieving the aims of former Interior Minister (now Deputy Prime Minister) Purachai Piumsombun, who, in 2002, said that “this government must find ways to reduce the number of foreigners staying in Thailand on one year visas”.

Unskilled foreign labourers shifting debris, may be the ones at whom this latest move is targeted.  The 1978 Royal Decree, concerning permitted employment, prohibits foreigners as manual labour.  Employers of Burmese migrant workers and construction labourers continually ignore this, and many such workers died in the tsunami.

Yet, the experience to co-ordinate post-disaster effort efficiently, is probably where most westerners believe they can best contribute, even if at the lowest management levels.  In some situations, that may be valid, but not in most.  Thai is spoken well by few foreigners, and communication confusions were not what helped Phuket resorts and hotels to re-open within a few days.

I suspect Phuket is experiencing foreigners migrating there from various hideouts around the kingdom, many hoping to receive freely extended stays on minimal finance or validity.  Once recovery efforts complete, they’ll sneak back to their low-cost-of-living haunts in Issaan, the North, or elsewhere, to recommence 30-day border bounces.  Others may use “giving tsunami assistance” in attempts to avoid visa-overstay fines.  The announcement may be aimed at people in this category.

I hope that one reason behind the announcement is the authorities recognising the necessity for creating a record of the quantities and types of manpower used in the disaster recovery, and that by registering foreign assistance, their records will be more accurate, and future disaster-recovery plans, more comprehensive.

Vice-Governor Winai Buapradit, responsible for work permit procedures in Phuket Province, as the “official entrusted by the Director-General”, agrees with Mr Chuaiyjan’s stance and has said that the law needs to be enforced, both in Phuket, and throughout Thailand.

“Now that the post-tsunami relief operations are slowing down, they should have work permits to continue working.  Otherwise, government officials will have no idea what they (the foreigners) are actually doing here – and this could result in trouble in the future,” he said.

If, as the Head of Labour stated, the registration procedure (for those offering their time, their expensively gained expertise, and in many cases – portions of their wealth), is simple and swift, AND free, then I’m for it – but he needs some training in how to present such announcements instead of using stereo-typical, uniformed-official’s belligerence.

Announcing it in this way, threatening prison for those who are helping those in need, is a PR nightmare for central government, and they should rebuke him for it, and then follow it up with further explanation of what was meant and what has to be done.  An apology for the overtones would be nice, but this is Thailand, and long-resident expats are not holding their breath.

The question remains unanswered as to whether government-invited experts, such as forensic scientists performing DNA identification of tsunami corpses, must pay for these work permits, and if they will have to perform the inter-office running-around by themselves.

Khun Sayan’s announcement appears to be a continuing story of Phuket going it alone without sanction from central government.  Nothing has been announced by neighboring Phang Nga, Krabi, or Trang Provincial authorities, and both Khun Sayan and Vice Governor Winai would do well to remember the clause in the law stating that whatever punishment an offending employee receives, the employer automatically receives a ten times higher punishment.

Authorised or not, the people of each province are the “employers” of all foreign workers assisting the post-tsunami effort, and they are the ones who now vote the governors into office.  They are also the beneficiaries of the aid that may be chased out of the kingdom.

Garry Harbottle-Johnson is South-East Asia Correspondent for Prime Publishing Ltd, a UK magazine publishing house, and a Foreign Correspondent registered with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Thailand Press Division.

(All Working of Aliens Act quotes are from the official English language “Certified Correct Translation” by Taksapol Chiemwichitra of the Office of the Juridical Council)