The revival of e-sabong, an online form of cockfighting, has reignited a contentious debate in the Philippines. This issue, which had seemingly been put to rest with its ban during the Duterte administration, has returned to the forefront of national discourse. Lawmakers, regulators, and citizens are now grappling with the complexities of regulating an industry that promises substantial revenue but poses significant social risks.
E-Sabong vs. POGOs: A Stark Comparison
Senator Joel Villanueva has been particularly vocal in his opposition to the revival of e-sabong, drawing a sharp contrast between it and Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGOs). While POGOs were banned due to their impact on the economy and the controversies surrounding them, Villanueva argues that e-sabong is far more damaging.
Villanueva highlights that e-sabong’s impact is felt more directly by Filipino citizens, unlike POGOs, which primarily targeted offshore gamblers. E-sabong has been described as a menace that preys on the vulnerabilities of the local population, potentially leading to widespread addiction and financial distress. The senator also pointed out a chilling statistic: since 2022, 34 enthusiasts of online cockfighting have gone missing, with many fearing they were victims of foul play. This dark side of e-sabong only adds to Villanueva’s concerns about its potential resurgence.
Economic Considerations: Balancing Revenue with Social Responsibility
The debate over e-sabong is not just about its social impact but also about its economic implications. The Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) has emphasized the significant revenue generated by e-sabong before its ban. According to PAGCOR Chairperson Alejandro Tengco, the industry brought in over PHP6 billion (around USD 110 million) annually.
The prospect of such revenue is undoubtedly attractive, especially in a country that is constantly seeking new sources of income. However, Villanueva argues that the government should not be forced to choose between harmful revenue streams and financial shortfalls. He contends that the state must seek legitimate, legal, and sustainable sources of revenue rather than resorting to industries that carry significant social costs.
Tengco, however, believes that with stricter regulations, e-sabong could be a viable and safer source of income for the government. He suggests that the key lies in better management and enforcement, which could mitigate the risks while still reaping the financial benefits. This perspective brings to light the ongoing challenge of balancing economic needs with ethical considerations.
Legislative Opposition: The Senators’ United Front
The opposition to e-sabong is not limited to Villanueva. Senator Imee Marcos has also expressed strong reservations about any attempt to revive the industry. Both senators share a deep concern for the social consequences of online gambling and have been firm in their stance against it.
Marcos, in particular, has called for vigilance against the resurgence of any form of online gambling, including e-sabong. She points out that after the hard-won bans on e-sabong and POGOs, allowing the return of remote cockfighting would be a step backward. Her stance reflects a broader legislative push to protect the Filipino people from the potential harms associated with online gambling.
Villanueva has also been a consistent advocate for stricter regulations on gambling. Even before the POGO ban, he had proposed a bill that aimed to ban all forms of online gambling in the country. His efforts underscore the growing concern among lawmakers about the long-term effects of gambling on Filipino society.
The Case for Regulation: PAGCOR’s Proposal
While the opposition to e-sabong is strong, PAGCOR’s Alejandro Tengco presents a counterargument that emphasizes regulation over prohibition. He recalls the previous success of e-sabong in generating substantial revenue and suggests that with the right regulatory framework, the industry could be brought back safely.
Tengco’s proposal hinges on the belief that better oversight could address the issues that led to the initial ban. He acknowledges the challenges in enforcing the current prohibition, as evidenced by the fact that 789 illegal e-sabong operations continue to operate despite the ban. This ongoing defiance suggests that there is a persistent demand for e-sabong, which, if properly managed, could be harnessed to benefit the state.
However, this approach is not without its challenges. Effective regulation would require not only stringent laws but also robust enforcement mechanisms, which have proven difficult in the past. Tengco’s proposal thus raises important questions about the feasibility of regulating an industry that has already shown a propensity for operating outside the law.
The Human Cost: Disappearances and Unsolved Mysteries
One of the most disturbing aspects of the e-sabong controversy is the case of the 34 missing individuals linked to the industry. These disappearances, which remain unresolved, have cast a long shadow over the debate on e-sabong’s potential revival.
The missing persons case is a grim reminder of the dangers associated with unregulated online gambling. For many, it serves as a powerful argument against any form of e-sabong, highlighting the need for greater accountability and transparency. The fact that these cases remain unsolved only adds to the anxiety surrounding the industry’s potential return.
For the families of the missing, the revival of e-sabong is not just a policy issue but a deeply personal and painful matter. Their plight underscores the need for a thorough and careful examination of the risks involved in bringing back e-sabong, even in a regulated form.
The ongoing debate over the potential revival of e-sabong in the Philippines is a complex and multifaceted issue. On one hand, the industry promises significant revenue, which could help address the country’s financial challenges. On the other, the social costs, including the risk of addiction, financial ruin, and even criminal activities, are substantial and cannot be ignored.
Senators Villanueva and Marcos, along with other opponents of e-sabong, argue that the risks far outweigh the potential benefits. They emphasize the need to protect Filipino citizens from the dangers of online gambling, calling for a focus on more sustainable and ethical sources of revenue.
Meanwhile, PAGCOR’s Tengco presents a different vision, one where better regulation could allow e-sabong to operate in a controlled and safe manner. His proposal highlights the ongoing challenge of enforcing laws in a way that balances economic benefits with social responsibility.
Ultimately, the decision on whether to revive e-sabong will require careful consideration of all these factors. The government must weigh the potential financial gains against the possible social harm, considering both the immediate and long-term impacts on Filipino society.