Unpacking the POGO Debacle: Is CEZA in or out?
Ah, Philippine politics and governance—where clarity is as rare as a unicorn and rules are more flexible than a gymnast on a sugar high. This time, we’re tackling the mysterious Executive Order No. 74 concerning the Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGOs), which, let’s face it, sounds more like a hipster cafe than a government regulation.
It’s been over three months since President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. decided to bless us with this document, and let me tell you, the wait has been… thrilling, to say the least. But in true bureaucratic fashion, what we got instead is a graduated-level puzzle entitled “Who’s Who in Gaming.” You know, just what we need—a game in a country already navigating through a maze of confusion!
The Good, The Bad, and The Unclear
Our beloved Senator Risa Hontiveros weighed in on the matter, expressing gratitude for the reintegration programs aimed at displaced workers. Because when life hands you POGOs going belly-up, why not throw some displaced workers a lifebuoy, right? But then she pointed out, and I quote, “may mga bagay pa rin sa EO na hindi malinaw” (there are still things in the EO that are unclear). Well, Senator Hontiveros, welcome to the club! We meet every Tuesday, just so you know.
What’s Actually Covered?
The Executive Order gives a good shove to both illegal and licensed POGOs and those slick chameleons now calling themselves Internet Gaming License operators (IGLs). We get it, they’ve put the ‘fun’ back in ‘dysfunctional,’ but wait, this isn’t just a game of Monopoly where we can arbitrarily change the rules. Some BPOs that cater to these POGOs find themselves dangling in the air like someone who just lost at a carnival game—what happens to them? Are we sure they’re not part of the collateral damage?
And let’s not ignore the casino dilemma. The EO suggests a circle of confusion by saying online games of chance in casinos are excluded. Here’s the kicker: does that mean POGOs could legally operate inside glitzy casinos like City of Dreams? I can already hear the cash registers singing a lovely tune of conflict!
The Curious Case of CEZA
As if things weren’t perplexing enough, we come to the question of the Cagayan Economic Zone Authority (CEZA). CEZA claims to operate in a freedom bubble, untouchable by the government’s gaming regulations. So, what’s the verdict? Are their i-Gaming operations included in this ban?
Communications Secretary Cesar Chavez attempted to navigate this murky water, but bless his heart, he seemed to have also lost his compass along the way. His answer, wrapped in bureaucratic jargon, was about as clear as a mud puddle after a rainstorm. “Adhere to the directive,” he told CEZA. Ah, yes, because nothing screams transparency like vague orders lacking any concrete direction!
Bringing It to the Legislation
At this point, one can only hope for a comprehensive law that’s as straight-forward as a Starbucks menu. Senator Hontiveros rightly pointed out that this confusion underpins the pressing need for a well-structured ban and a clearer framework governing these operations. After all, we wouldn’t want our political maneuvers to end up like a game of Twister gone wrong—someone’s bound to fall and it’s just not going to be pretty!
Conclusion: More Questions Than Answers
So, here we are, still shrouded in ambiguity about whether CEZA and its colorful characters will join the list of POGO casualties come December 31. As it stands, clarity remains an elusive beast in the realm of Philippine governance. But fear not, dear readers! At least we can continue to turn this political circus into a captivating spectator sport.
For those really keen to dive deep, you can check out the official documents for a good read that rivals a mystery novel. Because who wouldn’t want to unravel this grand game of charades? You know what they say, if you can’t beat them, just enjoy the show!
– Your (slightly bewildered) Commentator.
This article employs a humorous and sharp tone to engage readers while discussing the complexities surrounding the Executive Order related to POGOs, CEZA, and the overall landscape of gaming regulations in the Philippines. The aim is to enlighten while keeping the spotlight on the underlying issues and confusion in the legislation.
There remains a lack of unequivocal language regarding the Enriles’ Cagayan Economic Zone Authority (CEZA) within any of the official announcements.
MANILA, Philippines – Over three months following President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s verbal directive, the much-anticipated Executive Order (EO) No. 74 was unveiled. This order delineates the specifics of the comprehensive ban on Philippine offshore gaming operators (POGOs), which President Marcos initially pledged during his State of the Nation Address (SONA) delivered in late July.
“While I appreciate the objectives of the Executive Order, at nagpapasalamat din para sa reintegration program para sa mga displaced workers, may mga bagay pa rin sa EO na hindi malinaw (and I express gratitude for the reintegration program for displaced workers, certain aspects of the EO remain ambiguous),” remarked Senator Risa Hontiveros on Saturday, November 9.
POGOs and IGLs in the Ban: Concerns Over BPOs and Casinos
Executive Order No. 74 explicitly states that the ban encompasses both illegal and legally licensed POGOs, along with operators identified as Internet Gaming Licensees (IGLs). The classification of illegal POGOs is straightforward, whereas those recognized legally are mandated to cease operations by the end of the year as specified in Section 2(D).
What complicates this situation is the existence of numerous Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) firms that provide services for POGO or IGL licensees without being license holders themselves. Sources within the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (Pagcor) have indicated their eagerness for clarity regarding these “special class BPOs” following the EO’s release.
Although the term “special class BPOs” is not found within the EO, it does refer broadly to “other offshore gaming licensees.” The EO further specifies that this includes “gaming agents and accredited service providers offering supplementary services to offshore gaming licensees.”
Senator Hontiveros voiced additional concerns, questioning Section 1(b) of the EO, which states that offshore gaming operations “exclude online games of chance conducted in Pagcor-operated casinos, licensed casinos, or integrated resorts with junket agreements.”
”Ibig sabihin ba nito, puwede magpatakbo ng POGO sa mga casino gaya ng City of Dreams? Gaya ng Fontana? O kahit sa mga resorts na may mga casino sa loob?” asked Hontiveros, raising crucial questions about the implications of the order (Does this imply that it is permissible to conduct POGOs within casinos like City of Dreams or Fontana? Or even in resorts that house casinos?).
Examining CEZA’s Inclusion in the Ban
CEZA’s offshore gaming operations, referred to as i-Gaming, allow them a degree of autonomy. Katrina Enrile stated during a July 31 session with the House of Representatives that “CEZA enjoys independence from Pagcor and other sectors of the national government in terms of licensing and regulation of gaming within its jurisdiction.”
Senator Hontiveros remarked, “hindi pa din malinaw sa akin kung sakop ng ban ang CEZA at iba pang economic zones (it remains unclear to me whether the ban extends to CEZA and other economic zones).”
“It’s essential to note that CEZA operates independently from Pagcor due to its charter. This is presumably why CEZA was omitted from the EO,” declared Malacañang’s Communications Secretary, Cesar Chavez.
Chavez confirmed that CEZA must comply with the President’s ban directive regarding POGOs, as articulated in a memorandum from Executive Secretary Lucas Bersamin issued to CEZA CEO Katrina Ponce Enrile on November 5.
While the terminology employed in the memorandum adheres to allowable interpretations, it still offers limited clarity regarding the status of CEZA licensees in relation to the ban.
Consistent with Republic Act No. 7922, also known as the ‘Cagayan Special Economic Zone Act of 1995,’ you are hereby instructed to adhere to the directive issued by the President during his State of the Nation Address on 22 July 2024 regarding the immediate ban of Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators or Internet Gaming Licensees in the Philippines, subject to applicable laws, rules and regulations.
– Memorandum from the Executive Secretary to CEZA, November 5, 2024
According to CEZA’s charter, under Section 6(c), it is empowered to “approve, accept, accredit and allow any local or foreign business, enterprise or investment in the Zone, subject only to such rules and regulations as CEZA may promulgate.”
Interestingly, the controversial figure of She Zhijiang, a Chinese tycoon currently imprisoned in Thailand due to his involvement in illegal gambling syndicates, was able to enter the country on a visa provided by CEZA, as shown in travel documents submitted to Senator Hontiveros.
When questioned about whether CEZA licensees are expected to cease operations, Secretary Chavez reiterated that “CEZA is instructed to adhere to the directive issued by the President regarding the ban on POGOs.”
Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra weighed in, asserting, “All POGOs, whether governed by Pagcor or not, shall halt operations by December 31, 2024.”
As for the ambiguities surrounding CEZA’s status, Guevarra commented, “I will not preempt the Palace.”
Hontiveros emphasized the necessity for definitive legal frameworks to facilitate a clearer path forward, insisting that a comprehensive ban is imperative. She noted that the Senate is currently deliberating an anti-POGO bill.
See copies of EO 74 and the CEZA memorandum here:
Executive Order No. 74 re POGO ban by Lian Buan on Scribd
Memorandum to CEZA re POGO ban by Lian Buan on Scribd
– Rappler.com
Document/XXX” target=”_blank”>View Executive Order No. 74 re POGO ban on Scribd | View CEZA memorandum
The ongoing uncertainty regarding CEZA’s operations highlights the complexities surrounding the implementation of the POGO ban. Stakeholders are keenly observing discussions in both legislative and executive branches to establish a clear path forward as the deadline for compliance approaches. The focus now shifts to legislators and regulatory bodies to create a coherent framework that can address the overlapping jurisdictions and ensure that all gaming operations comply with the President’s directive.
