Interview with Dr. Wulf Hambach, Partner of law firm Hambach & Hambach – Can France trigger a stone-by-stone trend towards liberalisation in Europe?

Earlier this year, law firm Hambach & Hambach had acknowledged that the states are wounding themselves if they stick on to the old fashioned monopoly approach in times of the digital age.

Post that, there have been a couple of significant developments regarding the opening up of the online gambling sector in Europe.

While France has indicated about its plans to open up by the next year, a report was also released which urged the member states to hold talks on a “political solution” to online gambling-related problems instead of calling for new legislation by the European Commission.

Considering this it it vital to know if there is any healthy debate going on in Germany at the regulatory or political level which indicates that different stakeholders can benefit be it state, players or consumers with upliftment of ban or any restriction.

And according to Dr. Wulf Hambach, Partner of law firm Hambach & Hambach, there are positive signs as far as the liberalisation is concerned in Germany.

“I can promise you that there is indeed a healthy debate going on in Germany at the regulatory and political level. But behind closed doors as the Interstate Gambling Treaty – theoretically speaking – remains unevaluated until 2010. But believe me – many former proclaimers of the Interstate Gambling Treaty have already or are right now changing site to avoid unconvincing debates,” shared Dr. Hambach.

Over the past three years, the European Commission has been associated with Internet betting-linked infringement proceedings against 10 EU countries on the basis of the “freedom of movement of services” pillar of EU law.

For its part, France has recently unveilied plans to open up its Pari Mutuel Urbain monopoly to competition in 2010.

Going by the way France has unveiled plans to open up its Pari Mutuel Urbain monopoly to competition in 2010, Dr. Hambach thinks that this also puts some sort of pressure on a country like Germany to change its outloook.

“An unspoken internal EU gaming law expert principle has always been that if one of the following hardcore cartels breaks the EU monopoly chain, in total it is broken [referring to the likes of Germany, the Netherlands or France]. France from my perspective marks the beginning of domino effect in the direction of an EU wide step-by-step or to stay in the picture “stone-by-stone” liberalisation,” said Dr. Hambach.

Future still depends upon the development of the European law

The law firm had also categorically stated that the opening up of German gambling market depends on the development of the European law level and the future decisions of the European Court of Justice.

But in a recent setback for those who are pressing for EU-wide liberalisation of the gambling industry, MEPs in Strasbourg have endorsed a report which effectively upholds the existing right of member states to control gambling and sports betting. It has emerged that MEPs have by a huge majority voted against creating an EU-wide single market for online gambling, while branding the sector a risk-factor in fraud and addiction.

As per the information available, Deputies voted strongly in favour for the report by Danish Socialist member Christel Schaldemose on the `integrity’ of online gambling. In total, 544 voted positive with 36 against and 66 abstentions. The document urges member states to hold talks on a “political solution” to online gambling-related problems instead of calling for new legislation by the European Commission, which is invited only to produce research into the sector.

Referring to the current approach, The Remote Gambling Association (RGA) has mentioned that unfortunately many people have deeply ingrained anti-gambling prejudices and, of course, there are powerful vested interests that are opposed to the opening up of markets in the EU.

Assessing the sentiments, Dr. Hambach, says he still feels the same as far as the opening up of the sector is concerned.

“If – as I assume – the ECJ in its Santa Casa case decides in favour of the freedom of services and against the (incoherent) monopolistic regime in Portugal the path towards a liberalisation in Portugal and other member states with comparable legal background is open. And the EU Parliament and its members are not empowered to restrict the principle of the EU Treaty. But the EU Gambling Directive will not be realised (at least) within the next two years considering the attitude of various MEPs,” Dr. Hambach told Bulletbusiness.com.

This report asks – indirectly – for more legislative power for the individual member states to implement as many gambling restriction tools as possible arguing with the great dangers/damages caused by especially the private e-gambling sector, said Dr. Hambach.

He added, “But the report does not have a legal (binding) character like e.g. an ECJ judgement or an EU Directive and can be seen as one of the many existing reports on the anti-gambling front. The effect of this report on Germany is – in my opinion – is: To avoid an explosion of Germany´s black Internet gambling market through the present Internet gambing ban the customer protection will be realised in Germany through a cancellation of this ban. The installation of an in every respect efficient licencing regime in 2010 or 2011 is a likely scenario in Germany – e .g. to avoid further negative consequences for Germany´s Internet users.

Going forward, he still expects a continuous step-by-step liberalisation i. e. member state by member state and not vice versa.