Updated: Feb. 8, 2011 (Initial publication: Dec. 15, 2010)
Sectorial Analysis
ENGLISH
The College of the Autorité de régulation des jeux en ligne (ARJEL — the French online gambling regulatory authority), decided to bring a matter concerning three licensed operators before its Sanctions Committee on December 3, 2010.
FRENCH
Fiche thématique (Jeux en ligne): première saisie de la Commission des Sanctions de l'ARJEL.
Le Collège de l'Autorité de régulation des jeux en ligne (ARJEL) a décidé le 3 décembre 2010 de saisir la Commission de sanction de l'autorité pour un cas concernant trois opérateurs.
GERMAN
Thematischer Bericht (Online-Wetten): erster Fall vor der Santionkommission der ARJEL, die französische Behörde für Online-Wettenregulierung.
Das Kollegium der Autorité de régulation des jeux en ligne (ARJEL, die französische Behörde für Online-Wettenregulierung) hat am 3. Dezember 2010 beschlossen, einen Fall bezüglich auf drei Gesellschaften der Sanktionskommission übermittelt.
SPANISH
Informe Temático (El Juego): La primera referencia a la Comisión de sanciones del ARJEL, la Autoridad francesa de la regulación del juego en la red.
El Colegio de la Autorité de régulation des jeux en ligne (ARJEL – la Autoridad francesa para la regulación del juego en la red), decidió traer ante el Comité de sanciones un asunto sobre tres operadores licenciados el 3 e diciembre del 2010.
ITALIAN
Relazione tematica (Scommesse): Prima consultazione del Comitato destinato ad adottare delle sanzioni della ARJEL, l’autorità francese di regolazione delle scommesse online.
Il 3 dicembre 2010, il collegio della Autorité de régulation des jeux en ligne (ARJEL – l’autorità francese di regolazione delle scommesse online) ha deciso di sottoporre una questione riguardante tre operatori con licenza dinanzi al suo comitato destinato ad adottare delle sanzioni.
CHINESE
主题性报告：ARJEL(法国在线游戏管理局)首次向法国金融市场管理局处罚委员会提交案件
Autorité de régulation des jeux en ligne (ARJEL-法国在线游戏管理局)于2010年12月3日会议决定将一起涉及三家许可运营商的案件交由法国金融市场管理局处罚委员会处理。
Other translations forthcoming.
Context and Summary
Implemented by the Act of May 12, 2010, the ARJEL is in charge of regulating the online gambling sector, which was opened to competition by the same Act. The legalization of competition actually enabled many operators that were illegally operating in France from outside of France’s borders to legalize their activity by obtaining a license and complying with a legal framework.
The ARJEL is in charge of issuing such licenses to online gambling operators so that they can provide gambling services on the market. This certification is necessary for any operator wanting to enter the market. Currently, 46 certifications have been delivered to 33 different operators. They are divided up as follows: 15 have been attributed for online sports betting, 23 for poker, and 8 for horse betting.
After issuing these operating licenses, the ARJEL regularly and constantly supervises these operators’ behavior. If necessary, it requests they proceed with the necessary adjustments in order to comply with the law. However, no sanctions proceedings had yet been brought against an operator.
On December 3rd, 2010, according to article 43 of the May 12th, 2010 Act, the College of the ARJEL decided to formally notify three operators of their failure to fulfill their legal obligations. The precise details of the ARJEL’s grievances against them will be transmitted by the Board to the operators and to the President of the Sanctions Committee of the ARJEL, M. Thierry Tuot. Untill the final decision, the precise content of the ARJEL’s grievances remains unpublished.
The six members of this Committee will then rule on this matter after proceeding with an independent inquiry. According to article 43-IV of the Act of May 12, 2010, the Sanctions Committee has a wide range of potential sanctions at its disposal: it could simply give these operators a warning, or shorten the duration of their license by one year, or suspend the license for three months or more, or even purely and simply withdraw their authorization to operate in France. Moreover, the Sanctions Committee can add to these administrative sanctions a pecuniary one, by fining them (even in the absence of an administrative sanction), which can range from simple reparation of the damage caused by the illegal comportment plus profits generated by such illegal behavior, to 5% of the company’s total annual turnover (excluding VAT) in the previous year from activities subject to the ARJEL’s jurisdiction.
Brief commentary
Although it is not usual to comment on the simple beginning of proceedings, we decided to comment on this very first sanctions proceeding before the ARJEL, because this first citation before the Sanctions Committee of the ARJEL is a signal of the proper functioning of this new regulatory authority. Indeed, as many other sector-related regulation authorities, the ARJEL has an internal duality, including both a rule-making authority (the College) and a sanctions committee in charge of ruling on regulated operators’ failure to fulfill certain legal and regulatory obligations, after citation by the College itself. This internal duality, and the strict application of the separation between both entities within the ARJEL, guarantees the independence and the fairness of proceedings before such authorities.
Also, the scope of the sanctions available to the Sanction Committee helps it adequately adapt the punitive nature of the sanction to the damage caused by the unlawful behavior. Because it is more familiar with the sector than any judge could be, the Sanction Committee is able to use its disciplinary powers in order to elaborate a tailored sanction policy appropriate to the sector, and that will serve as an incentive for the operators to comply with their obligations.
Furthermore, since the ARJEL was created very recently, its first decision is awaited by the sector: if the operators are found guilty, the Sanctions Committee of the ARJEL can either adopt a strong decision and assume that in case of an appeal, the appeals tribunal, the Conseil d’État – the French Council of State - will not cancel its decision, or rather opt for a softer sanction, indicating an intent to establish its authority in a more progressive fashion.
Since a market for online gambling existed before it was made legal, the ARJEL could adopt a very horizontal approach to it by relying on co-regulation mechanisms to compensate for its ingenuousness, compared with actors that have years of experience on the market. Especially because of this imbalance, the Sanctions Committee could adopt a strong, hierarchical sanction, in order to remind these operators that the rules of the market are now different, at the risk exposing itself to the disapproval of the Council of State.
Lastly, the fact that Thierry Tuot is the President of the ARJEL’s Sanctions Committee is important: he is a State Councilor in the Council of State, and was the first General Secretary of the Commission de Régulation de l’Electricité (former name of the French Electricity Regulatory Authority). This proves that rather than find a specialist of energy or gambling to fulfill regulatory functions, the tendency is to consider, in the English style, that Regulation is a profession in and of itself, independent from the sector regulated, and that therefore experience working in a regulatory authority is more important than experience in the sector. This is further proof of the existence of Regulatory Law as an independent and unique branch of law.
Related articles
http://thejournalofregulation.com/spip.php?article574
your comment