Transcript of the above video:

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing Plenary Power and Immigration Law. I thought of making this video after reading a recent comment on our channel. Quoting directly: "Great advice as always Ben but one has to pose the question "If you don't have a definitive answer then neither do they?" What I am trying to say is if they forgot to dictate an actual limit, then surely you would be pulled over and issued with a warning but allowed in rather than denied. Also an absence of an actual limit, is there any right of appeal, after all no "law" has been broken?" Okay so what they are talking about here is I did a video on 'is there a limit to the number of Thai Tourist Visas one can get?' My response there was 'there is insofar as whatever the Thai Embassy abroad or Immigration Authorities decide at a checkpoint coming in.’

This commenter, what they are getting confused with is there is a law. It is called the Immigration Act of 1979 and under that law, Thai immigration Officers are vested with a great deal of discretion associated with undertaking the enforcement of Thai Immigration Law. What people don't really get about that is that very much entails what is called Plenary Power oftentimes in the jurisprudence of the United States. Plenary Power in the context of US Immigration, I would argue it is basically the same thing at the end of the day but it is a little more parsed out in terms of the jurisprudence out there associated with US Immigration Law because we have had court cases and things that have gone up to the Supremes and discussed and so we have got a little bit more, how do I put it, a little bit more explanation on the difference.

The way I look at Plenary Power if you will, it sort of sits in this nebulous world sort of between legal power, sovereignty it is kind of in a sense, you could argue it as where legality and sovereignty meet. I don't that is quite right; it is its own thing. Plenary Power comes about because there were just certain functions that the State needs to perform and in the case of Immigration that's a function that has been deemed oftentimes as an essential function to essentially the survival of the State. If a place is overrun by people that aren't from that location, that given jurisdiction like literally physically overrun, it can result in essentially the end of that polity, the end of that Government, the end of that system, the end of that civilization if you will, the end of that society and Plenary Power is vested in Immigration Officers. That's the same in the United States too for that matter but here in Thailand yeah, the way I look at it, again sort of as an outside observer although I have been through all the various channels of Thai immigration if you will personally, and we have assisted people here at the firm many different times but this whole thing of "there is no law", yeah, there is a law. There is the Immigration Act of 1979 which empowers Thai Immigration Officers to make adjudications as to whether or not somebody is fit for entry to Thailand. There is also, similar Authority is granted to Officers at Embassies and Consulates abroad who have to adjudicate whether or not it is appropriate to issue a Visa. So yeah there's a Law and they clearly have the discretion, the aforementioned Officers have the discretion to either issue visas, issue status in Thailand, grant lawful status to enter Thailand in Visa status and yeah again it is based on the Immigration Act of 1979 but beyond even that, there is Plenary Power that essentially grants discretion to these Officers to make their determinations on a case by case basis.