International edition
September 16, 2021

Ruling follows request by lawyer

Macau court says casino-junket links not confidential

Macau court says casino-junket links not confidential
Junkets are licensed to organize the issuing of credit for high stakes play, and the collection of money from any credit-fuelled gambling losses incurred by the players.
Macau | 09/20/2017

Macau's casino regulator, the Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau, also known as DICJ, has no right to block access of interested parties to the list of VIP gaming promoters working with individual casino operators, the Court of Second Instance ruled.


he decision is dated from July 27 and was subsequently lodged online, overturning a previous ruling on the case by the city’s Administrative Court.

According to GGRAsia, the gaming regulator publishes annually a list of licensed junket operators in Macau. The list does not detail the links between each junket operator and the city’s six licensed casino operators.

The latest list was made available in January, showing the total number of licensed junkets in Macau had shrank by 10.6 percent over the past 12 months to 126.

The ruling follows a request filed in February with Macau’s casino regulator by a local lawyer who demanded access to the list of junkets registered with a gaming operator. His request was denied and the operator was not named in the ruling.
The lawyer – also not named in the document – had argued that the list of junkets was relevant for two legal cases he was working on behalf of a client, also unnamed in the ruling.

In its decision, the Court of Second Instance noted that the gaming regulator had counter-argued that the list of junkets associated with each gaming operator was classified information under Macau law. The court however had a different view on the matter, GGRAsia reported. The ruling stated that if the request covered only disclosure of the names of the junkets registered with a particular operator – and not details about the respective business relationships – such information should be made available to parties able to show they had a legitimate, direct interest in such data.

The court also noted that DICJ had previously agreed for four times – namely in 2013 and 2015 – to provide access to the same lawyer to lists of junkets working for particular casino operators, before changing its view on the matter.

Leave your comment
Newsletter Subscription
Subscribe to receive the latest news and updates
Enter a valid email
Complete the captcha
Thank you for registering to our newsletter.