Transcript of the above video:

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing, well Thai Immigration. It probably seems like a strange title but there is a reason for it. I am going to go ahead and quote from a recent comment on a prior video, quoting directly: "What I have a problem with is the constant reporting and at the end of it you still look at re-applying every year and it is not even a Visa, it is an extension of an original O Visa but more annoying is the way each Immigration Office seems to put its own interpretation on the rules. Surely it should be a clear set of requirements and no gray areas. I qualify for my extension on income but my Immigration Office is different that (I think they meant than) than at least two others that I know of and there are probably more. WHY CAN'T THEY ALL BE THE SAME?" Well good question. 

I have done videos on this before. Yeah, different Thai Immigration Offices take different approaches when it comes to not only interpretation of Thai Immigration Law but also they have different administrative procedures. So like different offices will have a slightly different way sometimes of dealing with paperwork. Now the thing to bear in mind is at the end of the day, Thai Immigration's authority is rooted in the Thai Immigration Act of 1979, of that there is no doubt, but Immigration Authorities throughout the world, this is the United states, Thailand wherever you want to go, there is a plenary element to it, and plenary power is different than legality, like legal authority. Plenary power, is kind of somewhere between legality and sovereignty is the way I look at it. You can go back and get into like plenary authority back in like the old Catholic church in Christendom days and all of that stuff; I am not going to do a deep like that but plenary power basically results in a great deal more discretion because oftentimes it is viewed as a power of the state that is necessary for the maintenance of the state. So for example, maintaining proper Immigration protocols so that essentially a country doesn't get overrun by outsiders, that is a plenary power that can be vested in various officers and in this case yeah, it is vested in Thai Immigration Officers and it is evidenced by the discretion that they have and you will definitely see a different paradigm between Immigration Offices. A perfect example of this is the difference between the Bangkok Immigration Bureau and the Pattaya Immigration Bureau. They have kind of a different take on how things work and how things should be done. For example, down in the Pattaya Immigration Office, we have done videos on this before, presently the current Immigration Chief down there is doing things to kind of make things more comfortable for tourists; to try to streamline processing, make things more convenient. Up in Bangkok, it's much more business oriented and there's a lot more people so for that reason it's not quite as for lack of a better term accommodating in that it is going out of its way to accommodate tourists and things. The Bangkok Immigration Office is pretty lively; there's a lot of people in there on a given day; they get a lot of cases processed out and they can be pretty bureaucratic, it can be readily apparent. They are just different, I don't think that's, at all, I don't think that's a disparagement or anything on the part of for example Bangkok. They have things they need to get done, they have protocols they need to maintain and with the volume of caseload they have going through their office, they are just not as warm and fuzzy if you will, as for example the Pattaya Immigration Office is. That's just one example.

Different Immigration Offices have slightly different priorities because the circumstances on the ground in those locations warrant kind of a different take on how to deal with overall Immigration Policy and Immigration Law and Visa issuance. So again, not to say I am exactly defending it. I do understand the frustration but yeah it is inherent to the authority associated with an Immigration apparatus.