Malta to Launch Unified Self-Exclusion System

This story was published more than 2 years ago.

This week the Malta Gaming Authority announced that they've begun planning for a unified self-exclusion system for operators that have a gaming license in the country, allowing punters with addiction issues to gain more protection in the process.

The announcement comes after the Maltese Parliament voted to approve of a new Gaming Act law that has a series laws within the country. The regulations will form a unified self-exclusion policy that will see operators sharing a database for excluded players, keeping them from jumping from site to site. The law will also have extensive money laundering protections and make the regulator a mediator for player disputes.

Speaking about the matter MGA CEO Heathcliff Farrugia said, Heathcliff Farrugia, chief executive of the MGA, said: "The protection of players is at the heart of the MGA's regulatory agenda, and this project further underlines our resolve to ensure that players have the necessary tools to engage in gaming services responsibly.

"Over the years we have witnessed efforts from gaming operators to implement various responsible gaming measures, and thus we strongly believe that the unified self-exclusion system will be well received by the industry and consumers alike."

About the author

Therese Williams // UK Correspondent
Therese Williams
Therese is a fervent fan of slot machines and pub fruities, often trying her luck at some of the top online casinos. She covers news for Casino Listings with a focus on the UK and Europe. Therese studied arts and creative writing at university and has written for newspapers in the UK.
8 replies • Last post

Comments

bgsharpe
Forum AngelForum Angel
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 7348
Thanks given: 3971
Thanks received: 1092
28 May 2018 - 4:26pm
#1

That looks to be a useful and needed measures for preventing some of the most vulnerable players from just jumping from site to site as Dustin said above so any actions in that direction should be welcomed.

lvblck
High RollerHigh Roller
Location: The North
Joined: 6 Apr 2016
Posts: 2893
Thanks given: 169
Thanks received: 855
28 May 2018 - 7:44pm
#2

I agree with you sharpe but what I also think is that it's not that black and white. If I, for example, want to self exclude at a few sites for good reasons, I wouldn't want to be unable to play someplace else just because of it.

sharpe

krcoolsongss
High RollerHigh Roller
coolsongss's picture
Joined: 2 Dec 2014
Posts: 2723
Thanks given: 2013
Thanks received: 1347
29 May 2018 - 1:53am
#3

I think that this measure can be good for addicted players.

There have been some unfair casinos which use this Self-excluded function to block certain players, though.

bgsharpe
Forum AngelForum Angel
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 7348
Thanks given: 3971
Thanks received: 1092
29 May 2018 - 7:11pm
#4
blck wrote:

I agree with you sharpe but what I also think is that it's not that black and white. If I, for example, want to self exclude at a few sites for good reasons, I wouldn't want to be unable to play someplace else just because of it.

Yeah but we speaking of a real problem gamblers here, ( I assuming you're not one of these) so it could be really harmful for any of them being allowed to play at another place, but I agree, not a simple matter that generally.

lvblck
High RollerHigh Roller
Location: The North
Joined: 6 Apr 2016
Posts: 2893
Thanks given: 169
Thanks received: 855
29 May 2018 - 9:47pm
#5

No of course I'm not. I was just wondering how it would work in real life. But if it's for those who have problems, then of course it's great to do it.

sharpe

auCL-Ed
StaffStaff
CL-Ed's picture
Location: Sydney
Joined: 7 Sep 2007
Posts: 9427
Thanks given: 5387
Thanks received: 4760
30 May 2018 - 7:10am
#6

This sort of thing is sorely needed. Realistically if someone is an addict and has self excluded from one casino, there is nothing stopping them from signing up at one of the hundreds of others that are available to them.

I guess to address your concerns blck, self exclusion should never be used to close your account at a casino for other reasons such as a payment dispute or bad luck or whatever. I know players do this as it can be easier to accomplish than trying to get them to close an account for other reasons, when they often want to try to talk you out of it. But it really should be seen as the nuclear option only to be used for people with genuine addiction problems.

blck

Always play it safe! Consult our list of rogue casinos and warnings before depositing at a new casino.
Post in our forums to earn CLchips which can be used to buy real prizes in our CLchips shop.

lvblck
High RollerHigh Roller
Location: The North
Joined: 6 Apr 2016
Posts: 2893
Thanks given: 169
Thanks received: 855
30 May 2018 - 10:12am
#7

There I can agree with you 100%. And yeah sometimes it feels easier to just leave the account open or not deal with closing it, but I have never self excluded anyways.

bgsharpe
Forum AngelForum Angel
sharpe's picture
Location: Sofia, Bulgaria
Joined: 4 Nov 2014
Posts: 7348
Thanks given: 3971
Thanks received: 1092
30 May 2018 - 1:13pm
#8

Yeah I think even after these measures it would be still possible for a problem gambler to find a way to gamble trough relative or friend(also land base casino) but surely that would of be a lot tougher.
When I think again this should be implemented all over the world, probably would of tell you the opposite if I was so deep in the hole...but am I!?!