Online Gambling Offences And International Collaboration
1. Online Gambling Offences – Overview
Online gambling offences refer to illegal activities involving betting, wagering, or gaming over the internet where such activities are prohibited by national law. These offences typically include:
Running or facilitating an unlicensed gambling website
Offering online gambling services in jurisdictions where it is illegal
Fraudulent or deceptive practices in online gambling
Money laundering through online gambling platforms
Legal framework:
Most countries regulate online gambling under gaming laws, such as the UK Gambling Act 2005, the Indian Public Gambling Act 1867, or US laws like the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act 2006 (UIGEA).
Offenders often operate across borders, which necessitates international collaboration for investigation, prosecution, and asset recovery.
2. International Collaboration in Online Gambling Offences
Since online gambling often transcends national boundaries, international collaboration is critical. Mechanisms include:
Extradition treaties – To bring offenders to justice across borders.
Mutual legal assistance treaties (MLATs) – Sharing evidence and investigative assistance.
Interpol notices – For tracking suspects internationally.
Joint investigations – Between financial regulators, law enforcement, and gaming authorities.
International collaboration often faces challenges such as conflicting laws, jurisdiction issues, and differences in gambling regulations.
3. Case Law Analysis
Here is a detailed discussion of six significant cases related to online gambling offences and international collaboration:
Case 1: United States v. Scheinberg (PokerStars/Full Tilt Poker Case, 2011-2016)
Jurisdiction: USA
Facts:
The Department of Justice charged the operators of PokerStars, Full Tilt Poker, and Absolute Poker with running illegal online gambling businesses and money laundering.
Offences:
Accepting US customers’ funds for poker games without a license.
International Aspect:
The platforms were based in offshore jurisdictions like Antigua and Ireland, yet targeted US players.
Outcome:
PokerStars settled by paying $547 million to US authorities.
Full Tilt Poker operators faced asset seizures and criminal charges.
Significance:
Highlighted the necessity of cross-border law enforcement and cooperation between US DOJ and offshore jurisdictions.
Case 2: BetOnSports/Antigua v. USA (2004 WTO Dispute)
Jurisdiction: WTO (Dispute Settlement)
Facts:
Antigua and Barbuda challenged the US restrictions on online gambling under WTO rules.
Offences:
US laws prohibited online betting by foreign companies on US citizens, impacting Antigua’s economy.
International Aspect:
This case was handled through international trade law.
Outcome:
WTO ruled in favor of Antigua, stating the US violated trade obligations, but the US delayed compliance.
Significance:
Showed that online gambling offences could lead to international trade disputes, not just criminal liability.
Case 3: Ladbrokes International plc v. UK Gambling Commission (2010)
Jurisdiction: UK
Facts:
Ladbrokes, an online betting operator, was found offering betting services to customers in jurisdictions where they were not licensed.
Offences:
Operating an unlicensed gambling platform.
Outcome:
Fined heavily and forced to comply with cross-border licensing regulations.
Significance:
Highlighted the need for regulatory compliance and international licensing to avoid offences.
Case 4: Poly Technologies Ltd (China Online Gambling Crackdown, 2016)
Jurisdiction: China / International
Facts:
Chinese authorities targeted offshore online gambling platforms that were accepting Chinese customers.
Offences:
Online gambling and money laundering.
International Aspect:
Cooperation with Hong Kong, Philippines, and Cambodia to seize assets and arrest operators.
Outcome:
Several arrests were made internationally, and operators faced asset freezes.
Significance:
Demonstrates cross-border enforcement and reliance on mutual assistance agreements.
Case 5: R v. Liew Kee Siong (Singapore, 2013)
Jurisdiction: Singapore
Facts:
Liew operated an online gambling syndicate targeting Singaporean citizens via offshore servers.
Offences:
Violation of the Singapore Remote Gambling Act.
International Aspect:
Servers were hosted overseas, requiring collaboration with foreign law enforcement to take down the network.
Outcome:
Liew was sentenced to 4 years in prison, and international servers were seized through coordination.
Significance:
Shows Singapore’s robust approach to extraterritorial online gambling offences.
Case 6: Operation “Hardy” (EU and Interpol Collaboration, 2018)
Jurisdiction: EU / International
Facts:
Law enforcement agencies across Europe, coordinated by Europol and Interpol, targeted illegal online gambling networks operating in multiple EU countries.
Offences:
Illegal online gambling, fraud, and money laundering.
Outcome:
Multiple arrests in Spain, Italy, and Germany.
Millions of euros in assets seized.
Significance:
Demonstrates the importance of joint operations in tackling international online gambling crime.
4. Key Takeaways from Case Law
Cross-border issues dominate online gambling offences because operators and users are often in different jurisdictions.
International treaties, MLATs, and joint enforcement operations are critical to combat online gambling crimes.
Courts and regulatory authorities focus on where the harm occurs (e.g., where players reside) more than where the servers are located.
Financial and asset recovery often requires cooperation between multiple countries.
Online gambling cases can overlap with trade law, money laundering, and fraud, making them multidimensional.
RELATED Blog
{!! (isset($postDetail['review_mapping']) && count($postDetail['review_mapping']) > 0 ? count($postDetail['review_mapping']) : 0) }} comments