Philippine Senator calls for stronger action against illegal gambling

Why the crackdown is back on center stage

The political fight over illegal online gambling in the Philippines has been building for months, with senators pressing police and cybercrime units over why banned betting still thrives. In a recent hearing, lawmakers challenged agencies on persistent e-sabong and other underground sites despite repeated takedowns and sizable intelligence budgets. That scrutiny was detailed in a report on how senators questioned enforcement agencies over igaming failures, spotlighting a gap between orders on paper and arrests on the ground. A separate account underscored the same theme as senators hit PNP, CICC on use of intel funds as e-sabong persists, raising accountability questions that have now shaped the latest push for tougher laws.

The policy backdrop is shifting as well. The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas has been enlisted to choke off payments to gambling sites, while regulators weigh new restrictions and the Palace signals concern about addiction. The stakes have only grown as domestic platforms scale up and foreign operators exploit jurisdictional gaps. That confluence — enforcement shortfalls at home, payment workarounds online and cross-border hosting — explains why senators are again asking for sharper tools and clearer lines of responsibility.

Payments squeeze meets quick workarounds

The most immediate pressure point is the payments layer. In August, the central bank ordered e-wallets to sever ties to gambling platforms, a move that prompted market leaders to delink quickly. But operators did what digital platforms do — they routed around it. As documented when Sen. Sherwin Gatchalian called for stricter enforcement of the e-wallet directive, betting outfits shifted to alternative apps, including messaging and e-commerce channels. The senator urged the gambling regulator, the Department of Trade and Industry and the Department of Information and Communications Technology to extend the cutoff beyond wallets to any app enabling deposits or withdrawals tied to gambling.

That pivot underscores a core enforcement challenge: blocking access is not the same as shutting down service. Site domain bans can be evaded with mirrors and new URLs; payment limits can be skirted with informal processors, gift cards or third-party platforms. Policymakers are now weighing broader obligations on platforms to police gambling facilitation, and penalties for noncompliance, to close the loop that quick operator migration keeps reopening.

Regulation whiplash, market jitters and moral pushback

Investor sentiment has turned volatile as lawmakers float stricter rules. A proposal to harden know-your-customer checks, cap advertising, set a PHP10,000 minimum top-up and ban the most popular e-wallets rattled the market, sending shares of a major listed operator lower. The episode, captured in a report on the proposed igaming bill facing scrutiny, highlights both the size of the sector and its political risk. Even as regulators tout growth — PAGCOR reported PHP104.12 billion in first-quarter 2025 gross gaming revenue with e-games near half — legislative headwinds are intensifying.

The backlash is not just financial. Church leaders have condemned the ubiquity of online betting and the celebrity marketing that normalizes it inside homes and on smartphones. A pointed rebuke from the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines president argued policy is out of sync with social harm, shared in a post by Cardinal Pablo Virgilio David. That moral pressure aligns with lawmakers’ focus on youth exposure, debt and predatory design, sharpening the political calculus for tighter controls even as state revenues from e-gaming rise.

Civil service rules as a proving ground

One near-term venue for action is the public sector itself. Rather than wait for new legislation, Sen. Joel Villanueva urged the Civil Service Commission to use existing authority to prohibit government employees from accessing online gambling, mirroring rules already applied to land-based casinos. In calling for a civil service online gambling ban, he framed the policy as an integrity and productivity measure that could be implemented by administrative order. The move would test compliance tools — from network blocking on government systems to disciplinary standards — that could inform broader consumer protections.

The administration’s posture matters. Reports that President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. is weighing a full ban have not translated into a sweeping order, but the announcement of an igaming conference to address addiction signals the issue’s elevation on the policy agenda. An intra-government ban could become a template, or at least a political signal, for more expansive restrictions across the private sector.

Public money, private platforms and social costs

Debate over the industry also runs through the government’s investment choices. When the Government Service Insurance System deployed PHP1 billion into a listed online gaming firm, Sen. Risa Hontiveros questioned whether the pension fund had weighed the societal costs. The exchange, detailed in coverage of how a senator accused GSIS of ignoring the social cost of a gambling investment, sharpened the tension between fiduciary mandates and public welfare. GSIS defended the move as compliant and liquid; lawmakers pressed for frameworks that integrate addiction and security risks into investment analysis.

The episode raises second-order risks as well. If state-backed investors deepen exposure to platforms under tightening regulation, the government could face conflicts between protecting public revenues, safeguarding pensions and enforcing stricter rules. That triangle complicates the path to reforms and could invite more explicit statutory guidance on what assets taxpayer-linked funds may hold.

Enforcement gaps and the cross-border puzzle

The enforcement map remains uneven. Senators have scolded agencies for failing to apprehend major figures behind illicit platforms, noting that takedowns often hit small operations while larger hubs remain active. That frustration was echoed in detailed hearings about why clearly illegal e-sabong has outlived its ban. To widen the toolkit, proponents are pushing diplomacy and coordinated action with other jurisdictions where sites are hosted. A Senate dispatch laid the groundwork as Gatchalian sought tougher legislative action against illegal online betting, including measures to strengthen cooperation and move beyond cat-and-mouse blocks.

The case for new powers rests on three realities. First, most offending sites operate from abroad, blunting domestic takedown orders. Second, payment rerouting can keep services live even when domains are blocked. Third, high consumer demand and aggressive marketing ensure that new mirrors spring up as fast as regulators move. Without firmer cross-border tools, payment surveillance and platform accountability standards — and visible arrests of top operators — the status quo is likely to persist. That is the pressure point animating the latest calls in the Senate and the broader effort to align rapid digital growth with public safety.