TLDR
- Macau’s Commission Against Corruption criticized the Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau for trying to collect a fine twice.
- The case involved a casino visitor fined for nuisance behavior who was later banned from the venue.
- The fine was paid to the Financial Services Bureau but proof was never sent to the gaming regulator.
- The gaming bureau then asked a separate agency to collect the same fine again without checking payment status first.
- The regulator says it is now reviewing its internal procedures after the watchdog’s findings.
Macau’s anti-corruption watchdog has issued criticism of the city’s gaming regulator this week. The Commission Against Corruption said the Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau mishandled a fine case involving a casino visitor.
The issue began when a person was fined for causing a disturbance at a casino. The gaming bureau barred the individual from the venue and told him to pay the fine.
He was also told to send proof of payment back to the bureau. The person paid the fine to the Financial Services Bureau as instructed.
However, that proof of payment never reached the gaming regulator. Months passed before the bureau took further action on the case.
The gaming bureau then sent a written request to the Financial Services Bureau. It asked for coercive collection of the same fine that had already been paid.
No one checked whether the fine had already been settled. This meant the same penalty was pursued twice through two separate government channels.
Watchdog Points to Coordination Problems
The Commission Against Corruption said this kind of situation should not happen. It noted that government departments already have access to shared electronic systems.
The watchdog said departments are responsible for keeping their own records updated. It added that agencies should not rely only on residents to point out mistakes.
The commission’s statement focused on the process rather than the original fine itself. It said the bureau should have verified payment status before asking another department to collect the same debt again.
This points to a broader issue about how Macau’s government offices share information with each other. In this case, a simple check could have prevented the duplicate demand.
Gaming Bureau Responds to Findings
The Gaming Inspection and Coordination Bureau issued its own statement after the criticism became public. It said it takes the watchdog’s suggestions seriously.
The bureau said it had already begun making changes to its internal procedures. It did not dispute the facts laid out by the anti-corruption commission.
The regulator’s response suggests it accepts that its process needs improvement. It said it will continue working on how similar cases are handled going forward.
The fine itself was a routine penalty tied to nuisance behavior at a casino. What drew attention was the fact that the same fine was chased twice through different offices.
For the gaming bureau, the outcome includes a public rebuke and a promise to fix internal checks. Both the watchdog and the regulator have acknowledged that the handling of the case fell short.
As of this week, the bureau says procedural updates are already underway following the commission’s review.
