Christopher Costigan, Sports911.com
It’s a fight the United States thinks they have an upper hand on but when it comes to the rest of the world, they might end up fighting a losing battle. The tiny Caribbean island nation of Antigua appears to be winning over the World Trade Organization after filing a complaint that the U.S. has impinged upon its right to host online gambling establishments.
Marc Lesnick, owner of Startcasino.com, recently spoke to Joe Kelly, professor and specialist in world affairs, who believes that the WTO could find in Antigua’s favor come January and this will set a major precedent within the industry.
“He’s very optimistic that Antigua is going to win next month,” explained Lesnick. “This would mean the U.S. can no longer do anything about this. Essentially any country in the world will be allowed to host online casino operations without the fear of U.S. government persecution.”
Under normal circumstances, the three arbitrators would be chosen by each party, but because the United States failed to cooperate with the World Trade Organization, the WTO had no other choice but to appoint its own arbitrators, three individuals from Europe believed to favor internet gambling.
“The laws are protecting Internet gambling,” Lesnick told Sports911.com.
He cited a recent ruling by the European Court of Justice in the Gambelli case.
The Gambelli case deals with the compatibility of the Italian betting legislation with the EC Treaty. Under Italian law, it is prohibited for betting operators to accept offline and online bets from Italian customers unless they have received a license. Therefore all unauthorized operators, Italian or foreign, are forbidden to accept such bets. Violations are prosecuted under Italian criminal law.
The European Court of Justice has found that gambling, given the principle of subsidiarity, is unsuitable for EU legislation and is better dealt with at a national level. In the absence of EU legislation, gambling is thus regulated in the European Union at national level.
“The problem here is that Italy is going to argue at the national level that they are protecting a monopoly,” explained Lesnick. “This is simply not going to fly and Internet gambling will win across Europe long term.”
In Antigua’s dispute against the United States, the U.S. argues that Antigua has not established a prima facie case with regard to certain measures. More specifically, the United States accepts that total prohibition of cross-border gambling exists, wherein they cited both the United States vs. Jay Cohen case and the Wire Act.
The Jay Cohen case found that an individual was in violation of U.S. law by operating an online gambling establishment in Antigua that targeted United States citizens. In doing so, Cohen was found guilty of violating the Wire Act.
The United States has yet to dispute that most of the laws cited in the Annex to the panel request do in fact relate to the prohibition of cross-border gambling and betting services. It only claims that some do not and only on the basis of a deliberate misreading of the references to these laws.
It is doubtful that anyone could compose a definitive list of all United States laws and regulations applying to cross-border gambling.
“Should the United States lose, they are most likely going to appeal to a higher court,” Lesnick said. “Usually the Court honors arbitrators decisions however.”
Sports911.com will continue to follow this potentially precedent-setting case as it unravels.
It’s a fight the United States thinks they have an upper hand on but when it comes to the rest of the world, they might end up fighting a losing battle. The tiny Caribbean island nation of Antigua appears to be winning over the World Trade Organization after filing a complaint that the U.S. has impinged upon its right to host online gambling establishments.
Marc Lesnick, owner of Startcasino.com, recently spoke to Joe Kelly, professor and specialist in world affairs, who believes that the WTO could find in Antigua’s favor come January and this will set a major precedent within the industry.
“He’s very optimistic that Antigua is going to win next month,” explained Lesnick. “This would mean the U.S. can no longer do anything about this. Essentially any country in the world will be allowed to host online casino operations without the fear of U.S. government persecution.”
Under normal circumstances, the three arbitrators would be chosen by each party, but because the United States failed to cooperate with the World Trade Organization, the WTO had no other choice but to appoint its own arbitrators, three individuals from Europe believed to favor internet gambling.
“The laws are protecting Internet gambling,” Lesnick told Sports911.com.
He cited a recent ruling by the European Court of Justice in the Gambelli case.
The Gambelli case deals with the compatibility of the Italian betting legislation with the EC Treaty. Under Italian law, it is prohibited for betting operators to accept offline and online bets from Italian customers unless they have received a license. Therefore all unauthorized operators, Italian or foreign, are forbidden to accept such bets. Violations are prosecuted under Italian criminal law.
The European Court of Justice has found that gambling, given the principle of subsidiarity, is unsuitable for EU legislation and is better dealt with at a national level. In the absence of EU legislation, gambling is thus regulated in the European Union at national level.
“The problem here is that Italy is going to argue at the national level that they are protecting a monopoly,” explained Lesnick. “This is simply not going to fly and Internet gambling will win across Europe long term.”
In Antigua’s dispute against the United States, the U.S. argues that Antigua has not established a prima facie case with regard to certain measures. More specifically, the United States accepts that total prohibition of cross-border gambling exists, wherein they cited both the United States vs. Jay Cohen case and the Wire Act.
The Jay Cohen case found that an individual was in violation of U.S. law by operating an online gambling establishment in Antigua that targeted United States citizens. In doing so, Cohen was found guilty of violating the Wire Act.
The United States has yet to dispute that most of the laws cited in the Annex to the panel request do in fact relate to the prohibition of cross-border gambling and betting services. It only claims that some do not and only on the basis of a deliberate misreading of the references to these laws.
It is doubtful that anyone could compose a definitive list of all United States laws and regulations applying to cross-border gambling.
“Should the United States lose, they are most likely going to appeal to a higher court,” Lesnick said. “Usually the Court honors arbitrators decisions however.”
Sports911.com will continue to follow this potentially precedent-setting case as it unravels.
