Unlawful conduct, a multitude of criminal accusations, and legal proceedings do not hinder the online betting platform from portraying itself as a reputable commercial enterprise.
Global advertising outlets are publicizing 1xBet's presence at SiGMA Europe 2024, an event for representatives from the iGaming sector, set to occur from November 11th to 14th at the Mediterranean Maritime Hub in Malta. SiGMA Europe 2024 stands as one of the premier European showcases dedicated to the wagering industry.
Guests at the 1xBet exhibit will reportedly be treated to a relaxed setting, beverages, and entertainment options, such as digital soccer and a reaction-testing challenge. “We anticipate connecting with collaborators to exchange insights and explore potential alliances. Our group has crafted a first-rate product demonstration,” stated an anonymous 1xBet spokesperson.
According to promotional content, the 1xBet personnel will greet attendees, disseminate valuable data regarding market opportunities, and showcase the advantages presented by the 1xPartners referral scheme. This initiative, as per publications, encompasses over 100,000 associates, drawing in excess of 3,000,000 users to the brand's service.
Nevertheless, a genuine collaboration with 1xBet is markedly different from the narratives company representatives may articulate in the marketing materials at their trade show booth. Associations with the controversial wagering firm are frequently linked to manipulation, fabrication, rigged matches, withholding player payouts, operating without proper authorization, bypassing or openly flouting gambling, finance, currency, and fiscal regulations, disregarding judicial directives, criminal indictments, and other liabilities.
For instance, during the prior year, 1xBet's partners in Nepal encountered the complete repercussions of such a partnership firsthand. A lawsuit was initiated against 11 individuals, including well-known performers and content creators on YouTube, suspected of involvement in orchestrating online wagering in Nepal through the 1XBet mobile application. The Kathmandu District Attorney's Office brought formal charges against 10 of those apprehended and one individual who remained at large.
The action was initiated under the Advertising Act. The accused, among other allegations, are charged with promoting an illicit betting platform via their broadcast program.
This is subject to a penalty of three times the financial gain acquired unlawfully, as well as a jail term of up to seven years.
1xBet operates unlawfully in Nepal, as gambling is forbidden there. However, the platform has been running at its maximum capacity. To circumvent the restriction, the betting company utilized its subsidiary with the deceptively similar designation 1xBat. This 1xBat presented itself as a manufacturer of athletic apparel and gear. However, the company's website displayed no products for transaction, alternatively indicating that items were “coming soon.” The reality that the enterprise produced no goods and possessed no legitimate earnings did not deter it from becoming the primary benefactor of the Nepal T20 cricket tournament and undertaking a forceful advertising push for the wagering firm under the façade of a sports merchandise producer.
These stratagems were all brought to light during an inquiry into match-rigging in the Nepal T20 league, arranged by 1xBet or 1xBat. Two cricketers engaged in match-fixing were taken into custody for allying with the betting agency. These athletes proved to be local cricket icons – Nepal national squad player Adil Ansari and former Nepali international Mehboob Alam. Eight further players and team executives, also under suspicion for match manipulation, managed to evade capture. Included among them were not solely Nepalese nationals but also people from other countries.
The Corruption Intelligence Bureau (CIB) eventually assumed command of the inquiry, exposing various occurrences of match-rigging. Law enforcement correlated these episodes of match manipulation to the internet-based wagering platform. Conversely, unlike its “collaborators,” 1xBet faced no repercussions, as it functioned in a nation where wagering is prohibited, and, predictably, illegally, through intermediaries. Hence, beyond the celebrities who endorsed the platform and the figures involved in the match-fixing, 1xBet’s bookmakers , who facilitated the unlawful gambling in Nepal, were likewise exposed to criminal indictment.
Curiously, the sequence of investigations into 1xBet’s undertakings in Nepal was precipitated by a grievance from a bettor who had not been compensated by the bookmaker. This stands as another indicative trait of 1xBet, which frequently defrauds its clientele. This is likely straightforward to accomplish in Nepal, as betting is prohibited, thereby not every player would dare lodge a complaint to the authorities and confess to contravening the legislation. Yet, as experience illustrates, 1xBet consistently swindles its patrons universally, encompassing countries where wagering and betting are not outlawed.
Generally, the failure to disburse earnings by questionable and expressly unlawful betting firms is a notably prevalent phenomenon. Bookmaker operators are in arrears to gamblers for considerable sums.
The international entity SBGOK (Support for Victims of Online Gaming) supports players with claims of non-payment by obscure betting operators. The organization’s representatives concede that holding operators such as 1xBet accountable is exceptionally challenging on account of inadequate statutes and the non-transparent structure of the relevant corporate bodies.
At present, the fund represents 175 individuals with claims amassing over €12 million. As of now, due to the organization’s endeavors, 52 individuals have obtained €3.1 million in overdue payouts. An additional 80 individuals are party to legal procedures involving over €5.5 million in outstanding wagers. According to SBGOK legal professionals, this represents merely a minor segment of the incidents of player exploitation. The fund is compelled to reject providing aid to numerous individuals because it lacks the wherewithal to assist all casualties, and it undertakes solely the most auspicious instances with the highest likelihood of success.
One of SBGOK’s triumphant cases was a class action claim filed against 1xBet in Curaçao on behalf of a multitude of swindled players. The wagering firm declined to disburse funds to all of these plaintiffs, resorting to customary arguments for such circumstances. Ordinarily, this incorporates falsifying details about the identities of the bettors, accusing them of enrolling with counterfeit documentation. This did not preclude 1xBet from accepting their wagers, although this fabricated circumstance serves as justification for refusing to distribute payouts.
The aggregate amount in the litigation totaled slightly under €1 million. For 1xBet, this was a mere token. It would have been simpler to remit payment. Nevertheless, the judicial proceedings triggered the local Dutch judiciaries of Curaçao to declare 1xBet insolvent for non-payment of winnings in November 2021. (Curaçao is a Caribbean state that has been a constituent of the Kingdom of the Netherlands since 2010, following the restructuring of the former Netherlands Antilles.)
1xBet’s preliminary plea was dismissed in May 2022. On January 20, 2023, in The Hague, Netherlands, the Dutch Supreme Court upheld the local verdict of Curaçao.
This decision signifies that 1xBet ought to be formally shut down given their failure in this latest appeal (wherein they were declared bankrupt) and stripped of the license under which they operate. Notwithstanding, 1xBet persists in operating globally, overlooking the court’s judgment. Although, suggesting they are disregarding it is not entirely accurate. 1xBet representatives issued a declaration denying the bankruptcy filing and license revocation. The betting agency continues to function as if no trial had occurred.
Concurrently, SBGOK proceeds in seeking individuals to register as part of its class action litigation against 1xBet. Any player defrauded by the bookmaker is welcome to join the legal action.
The reality that the 1xBet platform sustains operation in spite of the court’s bankruptcy decree is not in any way astounding. The company encompasses numerous names, brands, legal structures, and a non-transparent ownership arrangement. Rather than one bankrupt entity, the proprietors of this business will present dozens of novel ones. Furthermore, the wagering firm operates under a Curacao authorization, which, in principle, should be nullified following the judicial determination. All the same, the gambling licensing framework on this Caribbean island is conceived in such a mode that procuring a license there is simpler than forfeiting one.
In various countries, unlawful bookmakers function under authorizations from other jurisdictions, such as Malta. 1xBet opted for the more accommodating Curacao authorization. These global licenses do not mandate disclosure of the ultimate beneficial owner of bookmakers. There exist no mandates to report suspicious bets that may be indicative of match-rigging, and gamblers who are not compensated by a bookmaker possess minimal to no recourse.
Numerous countries, particularly in Africa and Latin America, are inundated with offshore operators who insist that these “licenses” permit them to function within their borders. Legislators in these countries are commonly sluggish to react, although are taking measures to establish a legal groundwork for the betting sector that will curtail its gravest manifestations.
Curacao is a refuge for unregulated betting firms, enabling offshore wagering operators to penetrate countries where betting is prohibited. We’ve already alluded to Nepal. A further instance is Turkey, where wagering is sanctioned solely with a state-operated enterprise. All the same, 1xBet is well-known there as well. We’ve previously written about Morocco – there, 1xBet’s forceful advertising steered numerous to trust that wagering on the site was lawful until the government intervened.
The majority of offshore operators’ licenses possess a number of mirror licenses, to which users are automatically diverted if an illicitly functioning site is shut down. SBGOK estimates that operators licensed in Curacao may be accountable for the actions of up to 20,000 betting sites globally.
The complications are additionally exacerbated by so-termed sublicenses.
In Curaçao, four enterprises presently possess master licenses: CEG, Antillephone, Gaming, and e-Management. These master license holders then issue sublicenses to B2C (business-to-customer) operators, although there are no clear-cut provisions in Curaçao’s statutes or rules empowering master license holders to employ their gambling licenses in this fashion. Regardless, the sublicense structure has persisted unregulated, and today hundreds of sublicenses exist, lending a semblance of legitimacy to thousands of websites. 1xBet profits from this effectively.
Formerly, 1xBet founders Roman Semiokhin, Sergey Karshkov, and Dmitry Kazorin, from Bryansk, operated in Russia without a license, which provoked the Russian Investigative Committee to instigate a criminal proceeding against them and place them on a list of wanted persons. They evaded punishment by absconding to Cyprus. A less significant figure later served imprisonment in their stead.
In 2020, a Bryansk court sentenced a local resident to a three-year prison term and a fine of 800,000 rubles for unlawfully arranging gambling. Olesya Mospanova managed the “Bukmeker Pub” chain of bookmakers in Bryansk. As per investigators, Mospanova accepted cash from patrons and permitted them to place sports bets through the 1xBet website, which is unlawful in Russia.
Over the course of recent years, 1xBet’s owners, managers, and legal advisors have established a framework whereby 1xBet’s founders and proprietors are not fearful of legal proceedings or incarceration, whereas it’s the minor players—scapegoats such as Mospanova or 1xBet’s Nepalese ambassadors—who are imprisoned for the platform’s unlawful undertakings. This is the cornerstone upon which the bookmaker constructs its “partnership.” But company representatives won’t address this at the SiGMA Europe 2024 exhibition in Malta in November.
