The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) has exempted Singapore Pools (Pools) and Singapore Turf Club (STC) from the Remote Gambling Act (RGA), allowing the two outlets to provide restricted forms of gambling to punters under stringent conditions.

The law and order rationale

The rationale behind the move was that despite the introduction of the Remote Gambling Act (RGA) in Feb 2015, illegal online gambling was still a problem that hasn't abated -- it grows globally at an annual rate of 6 to 8 per cent.

Illegal online gambling is associated with law and order problems like unlicensed money-lending, secret societies, and transnational syndicated activities.

As Desmond Lee, Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs, said in parliament yesterday (Oct 10), "the remote gambling market will double in size roughly every ten years" and that Singapore is not immune from these global trends given our high internet and smartphone penetration rates.

In other words, allowing Pools and STC to provide online gambling alternatives was put forward as a "tightly-controlled valve" to provide Singaporeans a safer alternative and to curb the growth of law and order problems associated with illegal online gambling.

The clamp down on the supply of illegal online gambling

During the second reading of the RGA in 2014 in Parliament, Second Minister for Home Affairs S Iswaran made the following statements:

Clause 8 makes it an offence for an individual in Singapore to gamble remotely with an unauthorised operator. The penalty is a fine not exceeding $5,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 6 months or both. This is consistent with our current laws on terrestrial gambling.

Clause 9 is aimed at persons who may not be remote gambling operators but are involved in some aspects of the operations, such as being an agent of a remote gambling operator. Clause 9(1) makes it an offence for an agent, whether based in Singapore or overseas, to facilitate an individual in Singapore to gamble with an unauthorised remote gambling operator. Given the broader law and order concerns associated with remote gambling, Clause 9(2) also makes it an offence for a person in Singapore to facilitate others overseas to gamble. It will cover agents, who are also known as bookies and runners, operating in Singapore but who may be receiving bets from overseas. Our aim in clause 9(2) is to minimise the risk that Singapore could be used as a base for criminal activities of remote gambling syndicates. In the case of support services, the risk is exacerbated when any such support service is core or critical to the provision of an unauthorised remote gambling service. Enforcement will, therefore, be targeted at such persons. The penalty for an offence under clause 9 is a fine of not less than $20,000 and not more than $200,000, or imprisonment not exceeding 5 years, or both.

(Emphasis ours)

Clause 8 of the RGA deals with people who gamble online illegally, while Clause 9 deals with people who provide illegal online gambling to others. From Minister Iswaran's comments, it could be interpreted that enforcement efforts are targeted at those who provide illegal online gambling to others, and not to people who gamble online.

That interpretation would seem to be the case when news of remote gambling-related arrests involve mainly people who supplied remote gambling services:

In June this year, a remote gambling syndicate was busted in the midst of the Euros 2016. 12 men, believed to have received football bets amounting to $200,000, were arrested.

In July, 39 suspects in Singapore were arrested for illegal online gambling in an Interpol-led operation. They collected $2.5 million in bets.

More recently, the MHA has shared that over 120 people have been arrested for illegal online gambling since the RGA came into effect on Feb 2 2015. It did not share the breakdown between people who gambled online and those who facilitated remote gambling.

MHA also said that hundreds of remote gambling websites have been blocked and bank accounts used for remote gambling shut down since the RGA came into force.

But what about the demand side of illegal online gambling?

With the introduction of the RGA, people who gamble online illegally are liable to a fine of up to S$5,000 and six months’ jail. Individuals who facilitate remote gambling can be fined between S$20,000 and S$200,000, and jailed for up to five years.

There have been no known reports of illegal online gamblers being prosecuted and jailed; and punishment for gambling online is not nearly as severe as providing online gambling services.

Could this be one of the reasons why illegal online gambling is on the rise?

Using other vices as examples

Singapore's drug problem has been a success story because of the tough enforcement on not only traffickers but also drug users. It is common knowledge to the man on the street that if you've been found taking drugs, you'd be prosecuted and thrown into rehabilitation.

However this may not be the case for gambling illegally online. Though the laws are there, the lay man's perception may differ. Especially with how reports on remote gambling arrests only focus on those who provide it, but not those who consume it.

In his parliament speech, Lee argued however that "a direct comparison cannot be made in the way we tackle drugs, and the way we try to manage vice in society". This is because he felt that "the magnitude of harm resulting from drug abuse is vastly different from and much more severe than that for gambling".

If we could use another example, the continual problem of illegal streetwalkers, massage parlours/karaoke lounges which provide sexual services shows that clamping down on the suppliers of such services, but letting its consumers go free, will not stop the problem. Where there is demand, the supply will find ways to circumvent the firewalls.

Pools and STC's legal gambling needs additional enforcement to work

With Pools and STC providing a legitimate means to gamble online, there is now going to be competition among the legal and illegal sites to attract the gamblers.

This means that the suppliers of illegal online gambling will find novel and creative ways to attract gamblers -- like given more attractive odds or innovative bet types that Pools and STC are not allowed to provide.

Let's not forget that Singaporeans can also use Virtual Private Networks to access legitimate gambling websites overseas.

Perhaps to truly stamp out illegal gambling, the authorities should go beyond just providing a legal, safe avenue for Singaporeans to "release stress", but also more actively punish or be seen to punish those that gamble illegally now that a legal avenue is available.

This is similar to what animal conservationists would say -- When the buying stops, the killing can too.

Top image from gchampeau

If you like what you read, follow us on Facebook and Twitter to get the latest updates.