Analysis: Time for the European Commission to bare its teeth
The spread of dot.country regulated markets is a never-ending issue, but the non EU compliance of Greece, Belgium and Germany in the last few months has further increased the pressure on operators to rapidly chose whether or not to remain in markets where, under current conditions, they are often no wanted.
While the initial noises around October’s European Commission action plan on online gambling were positive, there was a nagging sense among some that we had seen this all before.
Questions had been raised in the past with regard to protectionist or uncooperative egaming legislation from European Union member states, however the EC “ for all its opinions and commitments to investigate “ had, until now, failed to prevent countries such as Belgium, Greece and Germany from introducing unpopular regulation seen by certain operators as being both prohibitive and non-compliant with EU law.
It was back in July 2009 that the EC first issued an opinion against Belgian proposals, which were considered non-compliant with European free-market principles. But when regulatory proposals were subsequently implemented, operators maintained that nothing had been done to make up for the shortfalls identified in the previous decade.
Land locked
Chief among the complaints is the fact that Belgian egaming licensees are required to hold a land-based presence in the country, and while some opted to fall into line “ PokerStars partnering with Casino de Namur and Unibet establishing a relationship with Rank Group-owned Casino van Blankenberge ahead of an online launch “ the majority have gone the other way.
Upon the issuing of the first licences in January 2012, the Belgian Gaming Commission (BGC) simultaneously pledged to block those operators that opted to bypass the licensing regime and continue to serve customers in the country from a dot.com platform. Peter Naessens, head of the BGC’s regulatory unit, anticipated 100 names could be added to the blacklist before the end of the year however the total currently sits at just under half that estimate.
The main issue surrounds those that, in the eyes of the BGC, are wilfully ignoring the process by directing Belgian players to secondary of tertiary domains with bwin.party considered by the commission to be among the main culprits.
While bwin.fr initially applied for a Belgian licence in January, the operator’s dot.com equivalent continued to serve the country and was blacklisted in May, with Naessens asserting that sanctions would be imposed “If they continue sending emails to players indicating on which other illegal websites of Bwin they still can gamble.”
The operator subsequently moved to launch an appeal against its blacklisting, but this was rejected by the Belgian courts and a follow-up legal challenge was not resolved until this week, when bwin.party agreed to apply for full licensure following an agreement with Groupe Partouche subsidiary Belcasinos.
At the time the appeal was thrown out, Bart Heynickx, a litigation specialist with ALTIUS (the law firm representing the Belgian government), said: “Had the court granted [bwin.party’s] request, it would have been astonishing and would have been a slippery slope leading to all sorts of abuses. Those who choose to operate outside the law cannot then claim its protection.”
Another issue at hand, however is that bwin.party is a compliant operator in a number of other jurisdictions, applying for and securing operating licences under the dot.country regimes of Spain, France and Italy, and what may have been viewed by some as flagrant abuse of dot.be system is considered by others to represent a protest against what it views as unfair and illegal measures.
A groundswell of opinion came to the fore in November last year during the detainment and questioning of bwin.party co-CEO Norbert Teufelberger in Brussels by local authorities. Ironically this was after he had given a speech at a responsible gaming day held by lobby group EGBA, where he had stated in his closing comments: “At this juncture, the reactivation of infringements and complaints against Member States who flout EU law is an essential step forward.”
Industry CEOs join forces
The move, described by Koen Platteau, partner with law firm Olswang, as “A new low in the relationship between the Belgian authorities and bwin.party,” sparked a backlash whereby representatives of 12 leading European operators sent an open letter to EC Commissioner Michel Barnier.
This response demonstrates the widespread opposition and identifies it as calling into question the principle of Belgian legislation within a wider context, coming, as it does, from a number of operators without a Belgian presence as well as those fighting being blacklisted.
Among those to put his name to the letter is BetVictor CEO Michael Carlton. “The problem is, does the EU law apply, or does it not? Unless the EC acts now and sorts things out then some markets will remain closed and it will be difficult to recover the position there,” he explains.
“We are at a crossroads and it’s affecting the whole industry “ it’s supported by more than just the CEOs who signed the letter,” he adds.
A full version of this article will appear in January’s edition of eGaming Review. To subscribe, click here.