Justification Grounds in EU Gambling Law

Abstract

This chapter pays close attention to the justification grounds and their legitimacy. First, it identifies a long list of public interest objectives that have been recognised by the Court of Justice under the headings ‘consumer protection’ and ‘maintenance of public order’ (addiction, crime, public morality).The chapter then discusses the ambivalent relationship of the state towards gambling: it has an economic interest in the gambling business as well as in minimising gambling-related harm. In the early case law, the Court found it ‘not without relevance’ that games of chance could make a significant financial contribution to public interest purposes. By contrast, Advocates General and the EFTA Court rejected the logic that the goal could (partly) justify the means. Only in recent decisions, the Court has recognised a conflict of interest of charity operators and public authorities, similar to private operators.Importantly, the chapter discusses in detail the public morality argument. It shows that, historically, the regulation of gambling was heavily influenced by moral beliefs. Christian religious leaders despised gambling as an idle and unproductive behaviour, and players were seen as morally deficient. Examples from the jurisprudence illustrate that the Court’s language as well seemed to be strongly influenced by a moral perspective.The chapter argues, along a two-category model, that gambling in twenty-first century Europe does not constitute a core issue of morality. The legitimate concerns relate to potential detrimental side-effects but not to the activity as such. Instead, a scientific perspective is advocated and the need to base public policies on empirical evidence.KeywordsCriminal ProceedingPublic OrderAdvocate GeneralPublic MoralityMoral ViewThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.