Why Is the Bangkok Post Facilitating Blatant Flouting of Thai Law?

Transcript of the above video: 

I really don't want to be making this video, but I'm making this video nonetheless. One) I'm very angry; two) quite honestly this is something that I view is very dangerous for Thailand. I've done the videos in the past talking about foreign influence in the Thai Legal sector and I think it's one of those pernicious things that seems rather innocuous but in the end, could have tremendous negative implications for the Thai Legal System, Thai Law in general. What am I talking about there? 

Well philosophically, what I'm talking about, let me sort of drill down in my thinking here. Under for example US law, there is this old body of law that used to pertain to what was called obscenity. It's largely kind of fallen into disuse mostly because of the way in which content is delivered, it's delivered in very private capacity whereas in the past Obscenity Law oftentimes pertained to things like adult movie theaters, things that were out in the public. A big reason Obscenity Law fell into disuse was due to the usage of VHS cassettes and then after that, things just kind of went even more privatized if you will from there, or peer to peer whatever you want to call it; it wasn't a matter of broadcasting things, or operating out in the public. That said, there's a notion under Obscenity Law, there's a test, there's a multi-pronged test to determine whether something is obscene but within that test, there is the notion of what's called Contemporary Community Standards. The reason I bring this up is as we saw in the evolution of Obscenity Law and we saw in the divergence of Obscenity Law in an American context, contemporary community standards could differ, and they could be manipulated over time by the media basically. What worries me is that especially here in Thailand, people get away from the notion that, hey certain things, certain occupations are heavily protected in Thailand and there are certain occupations that really need to be heavily protected in Thailand, most notably in my opinion many of the professions need to absolutely be protected. As I have discussed in other videos, for example the US-Thai Treaty of Amity does create a level of recognition of professionals between the nationalities of Americans and Thais. That being said, it does not have anything to do with the notion that foreigners - Americans or anyone else - can come into Thailand and start operating professionally within their legal sphere, so within the legal profession here in Thailand, or other professions unfettered here in Thailand. The medical profession for example is heavily regulated against foreigners coming in. They are able to become medical doctors here, but they have to pass the Thai licensing examinations and things. Again, that said there's a full prohibition of non-Thais engaging in the legal sector, period, end of discussion, and I'll get into the deep dive here very quickly but why am I saying that the Bangkok Post is facilitating flouting this. By the way, I got a bunch of people that tell me "oh you shouldn't make this video, people can get angry, they may sue you for defamation." I'm looking forward to it; I'm ready to defend myself in the Court. If you're going to say that me, coming out here and saying ‘foreigners cannot operate in the Thai Legal System is somehow defamatory’, I'm ready for that fight, let's go, drag me into Court. 

That said, I thought of making this video, I'm not going to quote anything from the article, I'm just going to point out the title, Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: Are changes in Thai Tax Law a Wake-Up Call to Rethink Your Visa Status? Let's be clear about two things. This pertains to some foreign firm here in Thailand that has foreigners that essentially are acting as lawyers here in Thailand. I don't know how that's possible, again we'll get into it, it's illegal. But let's also be clear and people have asked me: "well what did you do here in Thailand before you became Thai?" I was doing exclusively US Immigration work which is not my favourite thing in the world to do. I did not become an Attorney because I had some burning desire to be a Immigration Attorney. That wasn't what I want to do. I love Thailand; US Immigration Law fell squarely within the bailiwick of American Law; there are various treaties between the Thais and the Americans, most notably the US-Thai Treaty of Amity. I was able to do that, that was all I ever did, okay? Yeah, from time to time I might help people with the Amity Treaty or explaining the Amity Treaty to them. Again that's American Law as Incorporated under Article 6 of the US Constitution specifically the Supremacy Clause by dint of the fact that that Treaty was ratified in 1966 by the US Senate, okay. So the point I'm trying to make is operating as purely an American who's providing and dispensing American legal advice to Americans presumably, or those interacting with the American system, that is one thing. That is not what I'm talking about here specifically. That in a way is its own sort of treacherous place if you are trying to be practitioner there. Believe me, I know because I had to walk the very narrow line of that for 11 frigging years. Excuse the language, I'm not cursing, but I am getting pretty close because this really aggravates me. And people say "oh it's because it's somebody that may be in competition with you." Sure there are “rice bowl” issues there, there always are going to be in Thailand. I thought that was something all Thais took seriously as well. I don't understand why foreigners, again just get to willy-nilly operate as if they are legal professionals here in Thailand. The title of this article says it all, and it appears to be some kind of advertorial or something, I don't know. But again, this is somebody talking about Thai tax law and Visa status in Thailand. Those are two things that clearly are within the bailiwick of Thai Law exclusively, so why are foreigners having anything to do with it? Meanwhile, where is the law enforcement on this? Why of all of the things that they go after foreigners for for working illegally, the professions are something they just sort of shy away from? Again, this is dangerous stuff for the long term. Again, this isn't just me sort of dealing with my own book here. This is dangerous stuff for the long-term of Thailand. Thai lawyers should be the ones practicing Thai Law; Thai lawyers should be the ones advising people regarding Thai Law period, end of discussion. What is the alternative to that and what are the ramifications of having foreigners interfering in the legal business here in Thailand or interpreting Thai Law? I've done videos on that in the past and people were sort of like "wow you have a really complex sort of framework for your thoughts on that." Yeah, it is complex. I'm kind of a complex person; I've had to live a complex life, and this is a complex issue, okay? I take this seriously for a variety of reasons, yeah there is sort of some self-interest in it but also long-term, I don't want Thailand to be overrun by a bunch of foreigners who interfere and possibly cause problems within the legal system. 

That said, people have asked me "well where are all these restrictions and things?" Well, let's go through them shall we? Quoting directly from the Definition of Prohibited Occupations for Foreigners. This is from the Department of Employment's own website. We are going to stick this up on screen. So we are looking at List 1. Occupations that are strictly prohibited for Foreigners. Under number 27 of List 1. “Legal services or services in legal proceedings, except for the following duties” - so let's look at the exceptions first: “Performing duties of arbitration.” Is talking about Thai Visas and Thai Tax Law a duty of arbitration? Clearly not. Quoting further: “Providing assistance or representation in the arbitral proceedings in the event that the law applicable to the dispute being considered by the arbitrator is not Thai Law.” So presumably anything that's Thai Law is therefore restricted. Quoting further: So the definition, under the definition side: “Providing services in legal counseling.” Which as you can see in the article that I cited from Bangkok Post, they are talking about counseling. Quoting further:” Litigation and others such as representing, representing as a lawyer.” So just going out and saying I'm a legal, and by the way we have true fake lawyers here in Thailand; we have for some time now. They're in bigger operations than you would think too. Total frauds, complete frauds. Meanwhile, again just having a foreign credential doesn't mean you can do that here in Thailand as worth pointing out with these restrictions. Again quoting: "Providing services in legal counselling, litigation and others such as representing as a lawyer in all types of cases, acting on behalf of clients in legal matters, drafting contracts or making legal documents, etc. Except for the following works, which they say” arbitrator under (A)” quoting further: "Any work performed for the Arbitral Tribunal or the parties to the dispute in order to assist or facilitate the arbitral proceedings to be completed successfully or the work to either defend or to act on behalf of either party in the event that the law applicable to the dispute being considered by the arbitrator is not Thai Law."

So again, you can define this in the negative as okay there's an exception if you're engaged in arbitration of some kind, so long as it doesn't pertain to Thai Law. So clearly, foreigners should not even be discussing in any capacity that could be construed as an advisory capacity or some kind of an expert, should not be talking about Thai Legal issues. Immigration, Tax whatever, period. Quoting further: "Shall include the following works, again in the arbitration context: "Liaison for cases, research, compile, and provide opinion on facts and legal issues to the arbitral tribunal or the parties” - again regarding foreign law. Quoting further: "Note taking during a hearing using shorthand or other techniques in the same manner” - again pertaining to an arbitration, a very narrow subset of cases that even exist to begin with and as it is construed or pertains to foreign law. Quoting further: "Presentation of opinions as an expert." Again you can do it pertaining to foreign law in an arbitration proceeding. That therefore implies that in the negative, you definitely can't do it if it pertains to Thai Law. Quoting further: "Works involving special technology used in recording sound, images and evidence produced in the hearing." Again that's like a special witness. You would see something like that, I mean I always think of special sound recordings, I always think of the show The Sopranos where they have these special technicians coming in to talk about audio, possible problems with audio etc. Again, that's very specific and again pertaining to arbitration pertaining to foreign law, a very narrow subset of things. Again, Thai Law is clearly off limits to all foreigners. Now there is sort of this ongoing Shadow Boxing or games that get played with "well I'm not a lawyer, I'm a", it's like the movie Casino where he keeps changing his job title. He goes from Food and Beverage Chairman to Entertainment Executive or Entertainment Director whatever. Again, you can play all sorts of shell games with names and things. Here's where the rubber hits the road. Again, under number 26 of list 1 of the Restricted Occupations notes, "Clerical or Secretarial" so pretty much anything that could be happening ancillary to Legal work within the confines of a law firm could be considered the same thing. Quoting directly: "Clerical work means work involving shorthand writing, typing, teletyping, punching cards, tape punching, receiving-paying money, collecting money, calculation of production costs, calculation of wages and working hours, factotum, dispatch carrier, answering phone calls, taking in or sending out things, overseeing stock of goods, warehouse inventory, weighing, letter correspondence, accounting, general administration, receiving and sending documents, personnel, insurance, public relations, reception, booking travel tickets, library, filing documents, filing documents." Again, a lot of this is clearly covered here. "Statistics, survey, enumeration, editing and coding, proofreading, printing, photocopying, copying documents, addressing documents and other jobs in the role of clerks or staff in the clerical level as determined by the establishment." Again, pretty clear. Quoting further: "Secretarial work means work involving recording of statements, reports or accounts with shorthand, typing accounts from notes written in shorthand or from a dictation recorder, making appointments for the superior and reminding the superior when an appointment is due, welcoming those who come to meet the superior, inquiring, answering questions, making contact via telephone, presenting personal important letters and mails as well as letters." So again, and quoting further: "documents from various departments sent to the superior, drafting correspondence letters, filing documents as well as supervising staff and other tasks as assigned by the superior." Again, that pretty much covers anything you could be doing inside of a so-called Law Office, okay?

Meanwhile, people they'll say well Visas that's Agency work. You're a Visa agent, this doesn't apply to me, I'm not being a lawyer." Again, all these little games people play. Well, let's go over here to list of Restricted Occupations under list 1, subsection 19 and for those who would say "oh I'm a Visa Agent", well guess what? Subsection 19 says "Brokerage or agency work, except brokerage or agency working in international trade or investment." Quoting further: "Working as an intermediary or contact between two parties to make deals on insurance, trading commodities, trading or renting and letting property, or trading or participating in business services", - again business visas, Visa applications, as well as, and note: "letting or trading or renting properties, trading commodities, deals on insurance," all of that is covered. Quoting further: "or trading or participating in business services, and receiving a commission in return, except for the work related to international trade or investment." And you know who you are if you are really dealing with International trade fair enough. But that being said, this notion that oh we can just sort of skate around all this stuff “this is sort of vague and I'm a foreigner and I can do what I want”, no you can't, and I'm sorry I'm very angry in this because I've been here 17 years. I do have the fervour of the converted; yes there is an element of this that is somewhat self-promotional or at least self-protective. I do want to protect my rice bowl to some extent but I I'm very angry because it's galling because these foreigners come, I have been out here for 17 years, I adhered to the rules strictly. I had to walk a very fine line on a very narrow path and I've maintained myself to the best of my ability and I like to think that folks here saw that and that's the reason eventually I became a Thai etc. But these foreigners that are out here just flouting Thai Law, it is absolutely in my mind, it's reprehensible, I find it completely appalling and it's annoying to say the least. 

Meanwhile, why is the Bangkok Post out their facilitating what in my mind is a clear violation of Thai Law? Meanwhile, again by doing this it has tremendous negative ramifications possibly for the public at large because if they think they're talking to a real legal professional, they could put themselves into a detrimental situation relying on that belief. And what could have detrimental situation be? Well for example they could be getting bad legal advice. For example, in the article I was reading it and again I'm not going to quote anything, but I noticed in there they were saying things that were just completely off base with regard to work authorization or they were making very conclusive statements regarding work authorization and tax liability that just isn't the case. Again each of these cases is unique; it is going to be driven by its own unique set of facts and circumstances and you can't make one size fits all advice. Meanwhile again, people could be detrimentally relying on somebody who basically amounts to a fake lawyer here in Thailand. How many ways can that go wrong? Again, this is just bad policy across the board. The notion of one) sort of an amplifying folks who are talking like they are qualified legal professionals here in Thailand creates its own set of problems, as well as acting like you are a legal professional here in the Kingdom of Thailand to begin with.