The Agency for Electronic Communications and Postal Services (EKIP) does not have the ability to block either the IP addresses or websites of illegal organizers of games of chance. The Inspector for Electronic Communications has no jurisdiction nor can he conduct inspections of unauthorized organizers of games of chance. The draft law on games of chance is in contradiction with the Law on Electronic Communications.
This was stated in EKIP's comments on the draft Law on Games of Chance, which are included in the report from the public hearing. The agency also states that as the state regulator for the field of electronic communications and postal services, it cannot be subject to obligations imposed by law in another field, which is why they requested that the sections mentioning it and the Electronic Communications Inspectorate be deleted from the draft law.
The regulator recommends that this jurisdiction remain with the Gambling Administration and Inspection, and notes that blocking IP addresses is not possible without a court decision.
In the report from the public hearing, the Ministry rejects all these objections, and the Government, at the end of December, adopted the draft law and sent it to the Parliament, which retained all the articles that the state regulator stated were illegal and that its implementation in the intended manner was legally impossible.
The abolition of illegal watches was a condition for revenue growth
The Ministry of Finance's expectation that illegal gambling sites will be shut down forms the basis of their plan to increase the volume of legal gambling, to increase the fees paid to the organizers by around 50 percent, and to introduce a tax on gambling winnings. Based on all this, the Ministry expected that this area would significantly fill the state budget and thus compensate for some of the money it is losing due to the reduction in pension insurance contributions. Now, according to the Agency, this entire plan is falling apart.
During the public debate, the organizers warned that simultaneously increasing the concession amount and imposing a tax on profits, while failing to crack down on illegal organizers, would lead to a strengthening of the gray market and a decrease, not an increase, in state revenues.
Last year, the state earned 33,8 million euros from gaming fees, which is 12 million or 50 percent more than in 2023. The organizers also pointed out that unnecessary experimentation and the adoption of unenforceable regulations will jeopardize this growth, as well as future revenues and jobs in this area.
The Agency states that blocking internet access is only possible in order to "comply with applicable regulations, including court decisions or decisions of competent authorities that have been granted appropriate authorizations: "Therefore, it is clear that internet access service providers are obliged to act in accordance with the court decision, or the decision of the competent authority that has been granted appropriate authorizations. Since the Gaming Authority has been granted authorization, or jurisdiction in the field of gaming, internet access service providers are obliged to act in accordance with the decision of the Gaming Authority, which determines the blocking of access to the internet address through which they organize games of chance by an unauthorized organizer. In any case, by providing a direct connection, the Gaming Authority - internet access service providers, the number of steps is shortened, and therefore the time required to block the internet address, which ultimately leads to a faster reaction and more efficient suppression of the gray market, which has been identified as one of the most significant consequences of the current situation," the Agency stated, proposing that this jurisdiction be granted to the Gaming Authority, which the Ministry has not done.
Blocking an IP address is against the law
The Agency also requested the deletion of the part of the law that states that the IP address of an unauthorized organizer of online games of chance will be blocked by the independent regulator in the field of electronic communications, namely this Agency.
"We point out that the Agency does not have the ability to block either IP addresses or websites. The only thing that could have been done in the previous period on this issue was to issue a decision ordering internet service providers (telecommunications companies) to block their users' access to certain internet addresses. Since the Agency is not able to directly block either an IP address or a website, we believe that issuing a decision/decision ordering internet service providers to do so should be transferred to the jurisdiction of the Gaming Authority. Furthermore, blocking an IP address is also not a good solution, primarily because it is contrary to the Law on Electronic Communications. Operators of electronic communications services may not perform traffic management in terms of content control and blocking end users' access to certain content if this is not necessary to comply with applicable regulations, including court decisions or decisions of competent authorities that have been granted appropriate authorization," the Agency stated.
It also indicates that multiple websites can be linked to a single IP address and that by blocking that IP address, internet access service providers (telecommunications companies) would be forced to violate the Law on Electronic Communications.
EC inspector cannot control foreign websites
The regulator also requests the deletion of the article of the draft law that stipulates that "supervision over the implementation of the provisions of this law relating to unauthorized organizers of games of chance via the internet shall be carried out by the Electronic Communications Inspector (EC) and the regulatory authority."
"The jurisdiction and powers of the electronic communications inspector are exhaustively listed in Article 21 of the Law on Electronic Communications. This article does not provide for supervision over the implementation of the provisions of the Law on Games of Chance, nor any form of control over unauthorized organizers of games of chance via the Internet. The jurisdiction of the Agency for Electronic Communications as a regulatory authority cannot be provided for by the disputed article, since it is in contradiction with the applicable Law on Electronic Communications," the Agency stated.
She also points out that the powers of the electronic communications inspectors are limited to the territory of Montenegro, "while numerous, if not all, unauthorized organizers of games of chance are not even registered on the territory of Montenegro" but are from abroad.
The regulator proposes that the draft law assign this authority to the gaming inspectorate, or supervisor (a new institution for the supervision of both organizers and inspectors). He states that this is the only way to make sense, as the law stipulates that “the supervisor is authorized to request credit institutions (banks) not to execute payment transactions to the transaction accounts of persons who organize unauthorized games of chance.”
"We believe that the only logical solution is to provide for the authorization of supervisors in the part relating to unauthorized organizers of games of chance via the internet, and that it would not conflict with applicable legal norms," the regulator stated.
Bonus video:
