Belgian draft legislation rejected by European Commission

Maarten Haijer, EGBA Director for Regulatory Affairs said: “The requirement for operators to be established in Belgium is one of the clearest violations of EC Treaty provisions. It wrongly denies that many online gaming operators are effectively regulated, licensed and controlled elsewhere in the EU. As several jurisdictions in the EU already prove, it is possible to guarantee a high level of consumer protection and have a well regulated and competitive online gaming and betting market at the same time. ”

The Belgian draft law was notified to the European Commission and the other Member States on 27 March 2009. A detailed legal analysis carried out on behalf of EGBA highlighted a number of issues highly doubtful under EC law: the requirement for operators to be established in Belgium; the unjustified limitation of the number of available licenses; the unjustified restrictions on the freedom to provide services, and criminal sanctions on consumers wishing to play with EU licensed operators.   

This is the second detailed opinion from the Commission against recent draft legislation for online gaming and betting in a short period. On 8 June France received a detailed opinion against its proposed legislation because it also violates several Treaty provisions.

Both proposals seem to have in common that they view the online gaming and betting market on a strictly national level. Both Belgium and France also intend to introduce ISP blocking to prevent consumers playing with EU licensed and regulated operators. France earlier already received a detailed opinion against that proposal as well.

“ISP blockings cannot impose territorial boundaries on the Internet. Experience shows that such restrictions are difficult to implement, easy to circumvent, inefficient and foster the growth of an underground market” Maarten Haijer added.
    
Today’s detailed opinion extends the standstill period until 30 July 2009, during which time Belgium cannot adopt its draft legislation. The country is required to reply to the Commission’s views before adopting the legislation. If Belgium decides to adopt the current text without taking into account the Commission’s objections, it can immediately launch infringement proceedings.