§ 117 — Blocking of access to online remote gambling services, etc.

117.—(1) Where the Authority, after receiving a complaint or on the Authority’s initiative, is satisfied that the services of an internet service provider have been or are being used to access or facilitate access to —(a)

an online location through which a remote gambling service is provided in contravention of section 18;

(b)

an online location that is or may be used by individuals present in Singapore to gamble in contravention of section 20(1);

(c)

an online location that contains an invitation to young persons to gamble in contravention of section 34; or

(d)

an online location that is otherwise a remote gambling service advertisement published in Singapore in contravention of section 85,

the Authority may, after having regard to the matters referred to in subsection (2), direct the IMDA to order the internet service provider to take reasonable steps to disable access to that online location (called an access blocking order); and the IMDA must then give that internet service provider an access blocking order.

(2) Before directing the IMDA to make an access blocking order with respect to an online location, the Authority must have regard to, and give such weight as the Authority considers appropriate to, all of the following matters:(a)

whether, having regard to the content of the online location and the way the online location is advertised or promoted, the primary purpose of the online location —(i)

is for use by others to commit an offence under section 18, 20(1) or 34; or

(ii)

is to publish a remote gambling service advertisement in contravention of section 85,

and the online location is available for access by end‑users in Singapore;

(b)

whether the online location makes available or contains directories or indexes of other online locations which may be used to, or categories of the means to, commit an offence under section 18, 20(1) or 34;

(c)

whether the owner or operator of the online location demonstrates a disregard for the prohibitions and restrictions in this Act against remote gambling generally;

(d)

whether access to the online location has been disabled by orders from any court of another country or territory, or any foreign competent authority, on the ground of or related to remote gambling;

(e)

whether the online location contains guides or instructions to circumvent any measure, or any order of any such court or competent authority, to disable access to the online location on the ground of or related to remote gambling;

(f)

the volume of traffic at the online location by end‑users in Singapore;

(g)

the burden that the making of the access blocking order will place on the internet service provider;

(h)

the technical feasibility of complying with the access blocking order.

(3) To avoid doubt, the Authority is not confined to consideration of matters specified in subsection (2) and may take into account such other matters and evidence as may be relevant.

(4) In addition, before directing the IMDA to make an access blocking order with respect to an online location mentioned in subsection (1)(c) or (d), the Authority —(a)

must send a notice to the owner or operator of the online location (called the relevant online location proprietor), stating the intention to direct the IMDA to issue an access blocking order if the relevant online location proprietor does not, within the prescribed period —(i)

stop the invitation on that online location to young persons to gamble in contravention of section 34; or

(ii)

stop the publishing of a remote gambling service advertisement in contravention of section 85 on that online location; and

(b)

must be satisfied that, upon or after the end of that prescribed period or after reasonable efforts are made to send the notice mentioned in paragraph (a) to the relevant online location proprietor, the relevant online location proprietor does not stop the activity referred to in paragraph (a)(i) or (ii), as the case may be.

(5) Despite subsection (4), the Authority may direct the IMDA to make an access blocking order with respect to an online location mentioned in subsection (1)(c) or (d) without notice under subsection (4) if the relevant online location proprietor is a person to whom an order under section 87(1) is given and who has failed to comply with that order.

(6) An internet service provider which does not comply with any access blocking order issued against it by the IMDA under this section shall be guilty of an offence for each online location specified in the access blocking order and not blocked in accordance with the terms of that order, and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000 for every day during any part of which that access blocking order is not fully complied with, up to a total of $500,000 for each offence.

(7) It is not necessary to publish any access blocking order in the Gazette.

—(1) Where the Authority, after receiving a complaint or on the Authority’s initiative, is satisfied that the services of an internet service provider have been or are being used to access or facilitate access to —(a)

an online location through which a remote gambling service is provided in contravention of section 18;

(b)

an online location that is or may be used by individuals present in Singapore to gamble in contravention of section 20(1);

(c)

an online location that contains an invitation to young persons to gamble in contravention of section 34; or

(d)

an online location that is otherwise a remote gambling service advertisement published in Singapore in contravention of section 85,

the Authority may, after having regard to the matters referred to in subsection (2), direct the IMDA to order the internet service provider to take reasonable steps to disable access to that online location (called an access blocking order); and the IMDA must then give that internet service provider an access blocking order.

(2) Before directing the IMDA to make an access blocking order with respect to an online location, the Authority must have regard to, and give such weight as the Authority considers appropriate to, all of the following matters:(a)

whether, having regard to the content of the online location and the way the online location is advertised or promoted, the primary purpose of the online location —(i)

is for use by others to commit an offence under section 18, 20(1) or 34; or

(ii)

is to publish a remote gambling service advertisement in contravention of section 85,

and the online location is available for access by end‑users in Singapore;

(b)

whether the online location makes available or contains directories or indexes of other online locations which may be used to, or categories of the means to, commit an offence under section 18, 20(1) or 34;

(c)

whether the owner or operator of the online location demonstrates a disregard for the prohibitions and restrictions in this Act against remote gambling generally;

(d)

whether access to the online location has been disabled by orders from any court of another country or territory, or any foreign competent authority, on the ground of or related to remote gambling;

(e)

whether the online location contains guides or instructions to circumvent any measure, or any order of any such court or competent authority, to disable access to the online location on the ground of or related to remote gambling;

(f)

the volume of traffic at the online location by end‑users in Singapore;

(g)

the burden that the making of the access blocking order will place on the internet service provider;

(h)

the technical feasibility of complying with the access blocking order.

(3) To avoid doubt, the Authority is not confined to consideration of matters specified in subsection (2) and may take into account such other matters and evidence as may be relevant.

(4) In addition, before directing the IMDA to make an access blocking order with respect to an online location mentioned in subsection (1)(c) or (d), the Authority —(a)

must send a notice to the owner or operator of the online location (called the relevant online location proprietor), stating the intention to direct the IMDA to issue an access blocking order if the relevant online location proprietor does not, within the prescribed period —(i)

stop the invitation on that online location to young persons to gamble in contravention of section 34; or

(ii)

stop the publishing of a remote gambling service advertisement in contravention of section 85 on that online location; and

(b)

must be satisfied that, upon or after the end of that prescribed period or after reasonable efforts are made to send the notice mentioned in paragraph (a) to the relevant online location proprietor, the relevant online location proprietor does not stop the activity referred to in paragraph (a)(i) or (ii), as the case may be.

(5) Despite subsection (4), the Authority may direct the IMDA to make an access blocking order with respect to an online location mentioned in subsection (1)(c) or (d) without notice under subsection (4) if the relevant online location proprietor is a person to whom an order under section 87(1) is given and who has failed to comply with that order.

(6) An internet service provider which does not comply with any access blocking order issued against it by the IMDA under this section shall be guilty of an offence for each online location specified in the access blocking order and not blocked in accordance with the terms of that order, and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000 for every day during any part of which that access blocking order is not fully complied with, up to a total of $500,000 for each offence.

(7) It is not necessary to publish any access blocking order in the Gazette.