The familiar plot is staged again.
It has been almost a year since the Taiwanese actress blackmail incident, and I thought that Thailand would not easily use e-cigarettes to toss tourists.
Who knows, it seems that the situation is not so rosy.
There are also Chinese tourists who have become victims of Thailand's strange "e-cigarette law enforcement".
Mr. J, a Chinese tourist, recently traveled to Phuket, Thailand with a group. According to Mr. J, he bought a disposable e-cigarette for 300 baht on Patong Pedestrian Street. On the way, the tour group came to a shopping store, where Mr. J took out the e-cigarette he had just bought and smoked it, only to be found by the staff of the shopping store. Surprisingly, the staff actually called the police.
Soon after, the police arrived at the scene, confiscated Mr. J's passport and took him to the police station for detention. At the local police station in Phuket, he signed several documents and was then locked up in an iron cage detention cell at the local police station. After being detained for six hours, Mr. J was released on bail with the help of a travel agency. Police officers from the Phuket Police Department told him that the case would be brought to court and threatened him that "this kind of case will take 2-3 months to complete according to the normal process". The police told him that if he wanted to "expedited**", he would need to pay a "rush fee". Mr. J did not dare to slack off, so he had to go to the police station and pay the "court expedited fee" of 10,000 baht.
A week later, the case went to court. The court pronounced the verdict in court, and Mr. J was required to pay a fine of 428 baht. Mr. J hurriedly paid the money, and according to the original statement of Phuket**, after the matter was settled, the next step was to go to the Phuket Immigration Office to get his passport back. However, once again, the plot takes an unexpected reversal-
When Mr. J went to the Phuket Immigration Bureau to collect his passport according to the instructions of **, Mr. J was detained again on the spot and put in the detention center of the Immigration Department. The Phuket Immigration Department announced that it would repatriate Mr. J to China. As a result, after four days of detention at the Phuket Immigration Department, Mr. J was transferred to the Bangkok Immigration Department. After being detained at the Bangkok immigration office for another 3 days, Mr. J was forced to buy a ** ticket to return to China. Before being deported at the airport, the airport immigration police also told Mr. J that he had been blacklisted by the Thai immigration system and could not come to Thailand again for 99 years
Mr. J felt wronged. In Thailand, he said, vaping people are commonplace. In scenic spots, on the streets, there are Thai people smoking e-cigarettes everywhere, and even the Thai police who enforce the law, and the prison guards themselves are using e-cigarettes. Why is he the only one being punished, and the punishment is so staggering?
There are a few things about the whole thing that are hard to figure out. First of all, why is the punishment of Mr. J, a Chinese tourist, so severe?Although Thailand's current law does treat e-cigarettes as illegal, in principle, the main targets of severe punishment are dealers who smuggle and sell e-cigarettes. As for whether private possession and smoking of e-cigarettes involves illegality, Thai law is not clearly defined. After the report of the "Taiwanese actress e-cigarette extortion case" in February this year, Thailand** said that the police had no right to arrest and fine the e-cigarette holders without permission. There is even an Internet celebrity politician (Chu Wei) who once broke the news that ** has received an order internally and will not take action against ordinary tourists.
The only thing recognized by all parties is that ** has the right to confiscate e-cigarettes when the ordinary owner of e-cigarettes is found. But this time, the penalties imposed on Chinese tourists are unprecedented. Directly arrested, sent to court, deported, and blacklisted for 100 years. Is there a sufficient legal basis for such a punishment?What kind of motivation does it take to make Phuket** so aggressive?
Second, in the handling of this incident, is there any suspicion of illegal charges?
From the parties' accounts of the headlines in Thailand, we can see that this time Thailand** finally did not collect large fines (or "bribes") from tourists in private like the "Taiwan actress case". However, while Mr. J was in custody, an officer at the Phuket Police Station charged him a sum of up to 10,000 baht for an expedited fee called "Expedited Fee to Go to Court". And no relevant receipt was issued for this charge. Is the so-called "** rush fee" really existing in the Thai judicial system?Does this look more like a disguised extortion and bribery?
Third, Phuket, Thailand** once again opened the knife to tourists, what is the picture?
As we all know, after the "Taiwan Internet celebrity case" and "Pattaya blackmail case" at the beginning of the year, Thailand's routine of blackmailing tourists in the name of cracking down on e-cigarettes was made public, which discredited the company and damaged the image of Thailand's tourism industry. The vast majority of netizens inside and outside Thailand neither accept the extortion of some police officers, nor do they agree with Thailand's excessive control of e-cigarettes. Therefore, the image loss caused by the crackdown on e-cigarettes far outweighs its positive significance. At the same time, the Thai Pheu Thai Party** has actually been inclined to push for the legalization of e-cigarettes. Prime Minister Saita even publicly promised during the election that he would promote the amendment of the e-cigarette law after he was elected. As the window of Thailand's tourism industry, Phuket is the first destination to visit after Prime Minister Saita took office. At this moment, Phuket ** once again harassed tourists on the grounds of e-cigarettes, which not only endangered the core interests of the local tourism industry, but also contradicted the general direction of Thailand's new ** policy
It is doubtful that Chinese tourists have been punished so harshly for smoking e-cigarettes, but the motives and reasons for this are not pure.
From the staff of the shopping store to report the tourists, to the local ** clever name to charge "additional fees", it is suspicious that there is a transfer of interests, which is a new form of local law enforcement through random law enforcement to achieve departmental income.
A country's law enforcement agencies naturally have the right to enforce the law in accordance with its own laws and regulations.
However, Thailand's e-cigarette-related regulations, frankly speaking, are behind the times, lack their inherent rationality, and lack the environment and foundation for fair law enforcement, which will have a serious impact on the tourism industry itself.
E-cigarettes, which are a safer and healthier alternative to traditional tobacco, do not deserve such a severe crackdown.
Especially in Thailand, such a country where even ** can be bought on the street and smoked openly, it is unbelievable that such a severe punishment for e-cigarettes has been adopted.
The reality in Thailand is that e-cigarettes have become commonplace in society, and even Thai public figures, law enforcement teams, and there is no shortage of e-cigarette users.
In this case, it is difficult for the average tourist to understand that there are strict legal restrictions on e-cigarettes in Thailand.
If you really want to be punished, you must also have a rule.
Even if the law enforcement is carried out against e-cigarette users, there must be a reasonable force and clear standards.
As long as there is no trafficking involved, for ordinary tourists, it can be confiscated, warned, punished, and even fined to a certain extent.
However, there is neither a clear legal basis nor a reasonable necessity for prolonged detention and hasty deportation.
Why did the Immigration Department deport the tourists when the court only fined him more than 400 baht?Why was the decision to repatriate not explained to the tourist himself at the stage of the court's sentencing?
Is there a need for deportation and blacklisting for an act that is only worth a fine of 400 baht?
All this is incomprehensible.
It's more like a random punishment that is unruly, a kind of income-generating test of the existing rules, and a stress response of "dealing with it quickly after tossing".
In Thailand, the recovery of tourism has not yet been achieved, and there is still a long way to go to rebuild the confidence of Chinese tourists.
At such a time, the old state is re-sprouted, the old disease is **, and such an unreasonable punishment for Chinese tourists is easy to cause new misunderstandings in Chinese society and new misunderstandings and fears for Chinese tourists about Thailand.
Therefore, excessive law enforcement of e-cigarettes is not conducive to Thailand's economic development, nor is it conducive to the construction of Thailand's rule of law.
After receiving the news from the parties, Thai headlines immediately fed back the matter to the top management of Thailand, and received a promise that the matter would be thoroughly investigated as soon as possible.
We call on the relevant Thai authorities, in particular the Phuket local police and immigration authorities, to come forward to clarify and explain the details of this case.
The core issues such as why such a severe punishment was imposed, why it was repatriated, and why the so-called "expedited court fee" was charged.
In this way, a convincing explanation is given to the Chinese parties, and an acceptable standard is also given to the majority of Chinese tourists going to Thailand.
Thailand is far from the moment when it can be tossed again.
If Thailand still wants Chinese tourists to rebuild their confidence, rather than having a "don't come anyway, what's the matter" mentality, it should respond fairly and openly to this puzzling law enforcement behavior.
It is good to teach people that Thailand is not a place where they will be detained and repatriated casually.