THE authorities need stronger legal measures to combat the country’s escalating illegal gambling and bookmaking problem.
Both the Common Gaming Houses Act and the Betting Act, enacted in 1953, require revisions to keep pace with technological advancements, particularly the ability to engage in such activities online.
These legislation, now approximately 70 years old, are outdated and ill-suited to address gambling in the digital realm.
The Finance Ministry, Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission, Bank Negara Malaysia, and the police have been in discussions since 2017 to develop a regulatory framework for an overhaul.
However, progress on this proposal seems to have stalled.
While efforts to amend both laws were initiated in 2019, lawmakers have not taken significant action to drive this change forward.
The only notable development was a 20-fold increase in penalties for illegal gamblers and gambling operators under the Common Gaming Houses Act in 2020, raising the fine from RM5,000 to RM100,000, accompanied by a minimum jail sentence of six months.
When Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail emphasised on Friday the necessity for legislative amendments to keep up with the times, he was correct.
The government must demonstrate genuine commitment to implementing the new law.
It is high time to strengthen the legislation, effectively combating the online menace and ending illegal operators who exploit these legal loopholes, causing the country to lose around RM4bil in revenue every year.
While the proposed amendments may temporarily solve the outdated laws, enacting new legislation is essential for long-term enforcement and adapting to ever-evolving Internet technology, which facilitates online gambling.
Apart from the Common Gaming Houses Act, other laws governing the gaming industry, such as the Lotteries Act 1952, Betting Act 1953, and Pool Betting Act 1967, require the government’s attention.
These laws are all similarly antiquated, and the prescribed fines and jail sentences are comparatively lenient in today’s context.
Consequently, criminal syndicates exploit these loopholes for illegal betting and gaming. Even if caught, these individuals are willing to pay the relatively small fines, considering the enormous profits they generate from their illicit operations.
Therefore, introducing new laws would control illegal activities and contribute to increased tax revenue.
Perhaps the government could consider adopting a law similar to Singapore’s Remote Gambling Act to combat illegal online gambling.
This legislation covers all forms of online gambling, legal or illegal, and imposes penalties on unauthorised operators conducting business in Singapore through online platforms.
The Singaporean law empowers banks to block transactions or payments to online gambling operators and vice versa, while individuals involved in the industry, including third-party managers, also face legal consequences.
With the renewed interest expressed by Saifuddin, we hope Malaysian lawmakers will take decisive action this time and vote to set in motion stricter legislation soon.
