No sorry, Lina Goldberg's report is a complete waste of time. The ministry has been very clear in that no work = no requirement for a work permit. The fact that on the ground a certain amount of extortion has been going on doesn't change that.

I actually engaged the services of a local lawyer on this and they were very clear that no work = no work permit required too.

There's been so much bollocks on this issue circulated that it's insane. An ordinary visa is simply a visa that allows you to enter and exit Cambodia for longer periods of time (and more often) than a tourist visa does.

It would be quite reasonable for say, a Thai businessman doing regular business with Cambodian partners, to obtain such a visa and not reside in Cambodia at all. Back when I lived in Saigon I maintained a Cambodian ordinary visa; I'm 100% confident that I didn't need a work permit to do so.

You are quite correct that residency permits are impossible to obtain and that makes the pride in being "legal" with a work permit ridiculous. But it's very, very clear that a work permit is required to work here and not to reside here too.

Those pushing the "it's a legal requirement" have been agents hoping to cash in on work permits. They have flooded social media, the Phnom Penh Post and various other places with their bollocks - not once have any of them declared their vested interests in their "translations of the prakas" etc.

TheGrinchSR wrote:There's been so much bollocks on this issue circulated that it's insane. An ordinary visa is simply a visa that allows you to enter and exit Cambodia for longer periods of time (and more often) than a tourist visa does.

Could you please ask your lawyer why the immigration law states different? I am very interested in his interpretation. (Not being sarcastic by the way.)

TheGrinchSR wrote:Those pushing the "it's a legal requirement" have been agents hoping to cash in on work permits. They have flooded social media, the Phnom Penh Post and various other places with their bollocks - not once have any of them declared their vested interests in their "translations of the prakas" etc.

Not pointing fingers, I hope. Also, you have The Phnom Penh Post to thank for the removal of the blood test from the work permit application process.

My lawyer says that the immigration law clearly states you need a work permit if you are employed. You do not need one as a business owner (investor) though it appears that's being ignored but school children, the retired, those living off savings, etc. are 100% not employed.

I found it interesting that the translated versions of the prakas that appeared following the original crackdown announcement (which was targeted specifically at Viet, Chinese and Korean workers until the dozy Western community went to demand "answers" from authority) were substantially different to the ones in existence prior to that point.

The only grey area is those working for NGOs that don't qualify for NGO permits... it appears that even if you're working for no rewards - you still probably need a work permit.

As for the Phnom Penh Post - their first "scare article" was written by an agent with no mention whatsoever of his vested interests in selling work permits. It's also the same newspaper which stole an entire expose word-for-word from the Guardian. I have very little time for press which fails to acknowledge sources of bias or outright plagiarism. Even if they do manage to do the occasional bit of good.

TheGrinchSR wrote:It's also the same newspaper which stole an entire expose word-for-word from the Guardian. I have very little time for press which fails to acknowledge sources of bias or outright plagiarism. Even if they do manage to do the occasional bit of good.

Link to Guardian plagiarized piece?

Anyway, I think we can all agree that the govt stance on work permits is not "clear" as previously expressed.

If people can bid for ministerial positions, it shouldn't surprise us if they feel entitled to be creative in recovering their deposit.

I believe they are given a degree of freedom, which includes deliberate obfuscation of the facts, coupled with a lack of publication of clear, universally-applied guidelines, even to the extent that not even lawyers know wtf the standard is.

Reminds me of the church using Latin to stop critical thinking.

It seems to have run out of steam, hopefully.

The BBC should do an investigative piece into English-language newspapers benefiting, disgraceful, and they accuse the government of corruption, what a joke.

Maybe someone should delete Frank's passport info from the OP, he's been nice enough to report candidly on his experience here.