Ar azartinių lošimų reklamos draudimas nepažeidžia sąžiningos konkurencijos principo?
Survila, Juras |
Dėl ribotos viešoje erdvėje pateikiamos informacijos stokos nėra aiškaus teisinio apibrėžtumo apie tai, ar visiškas azartinių lošimų reklamos draudimas nepažeidžia sąžiningos konkurencijos principo ūkio subjektų atžvilgiu. Keliama rizika, kad ilgesnį laiką rinkoje veikiančios azartinių lošimų bendrovės, turėdamos plačią klientų bazę ir įtaką, gali įgyti pranašumą tarpusavio konkurencijoje prieš naujus rinkos dalyvius, taip sudarydamos sąlygas piktnaudžiavimui esama situacija. Šio magistro baigiamojo darbo tikslas yra išsiaiškinti ar įsigaliojus tokiam draudimui, sąžiningos konkurencijos institutas ir toliau galės užtikrinti vienodas sąlygas visoms azartinių lošimų bendrovėms. Pirmajame skyriuje apibrėžiamos pagrindinės sąžiningos konkurencijos principo vertybės ir nagrinėjamas šio principo taikymas nacionalinėje bei Europos Sąjungos teisėje. Antrajame skyriuje analizuojamos priežastys, lėmusios iki šiol galiojančio azartinių lošimų reklamos teisinio reguliavimo pakeitimą ir vertinama, ar visiškas azartinių lošimų reklamos draudimas neprieštarauja ūkinės veiklos laisvės vertybei – sąžiningai konkurencijai. Šiame skyriuje atliekama lyginamoji analizė, vertinant Belgijos, Italijos ir Latvijos azartinių lošimų reklamos draudimo priežastis bei analizuojama Italijos praktinė patirtis po visiško draudimo įsigaliojimo. Trečiajame skyriuje aiškinamos saugotinos vertybės, kurioms prieštaravo alkoholio produktų ir tabako, tabako gaminių ir su jais susijusių gaminių reklama. Be kita ko, išsamiai vertinama azartinių lošimų priklausomybės problema alkoholio, tabako gaminių ir narkotinių medžiagų priklausomybių kontekste bei nustatomas azartinių lošimų priklausomybės paplitimas Lietuvos visuomenėje. Atlikus darbą nustatyta, kad visiškas azartinių lošimų reklamos draudimas nepažeidžia sąžiningos konkurencijos principo, tačiau riboja sąžiningos konkurencijos laisvę, taip paneigiant tyrimo hipotezę. Sąžiningos konkurencijos laisvė nėra tapatinama su sąžiningos konkurencijos principu. Remiantis atlikta analize, nustatyta, kad visiškas azartinių reklamos draudimas nėra veiksminga priemonė mažinant lošiančiųjų asmenų skaičių ir azartinių lošimų daromą poveikį visuomenei. Todėl siūloma, vietoje visiško draudimo, labiau orientuotis į Lietuvos visuomenės švietimą apie azartinių lošimų poveikį, pasitelkiant visas galimas informavimo priemones, bei stiprinti azartinių lošimų priklausomybės gydymo sistemą. Azartinių lošimų reklamos draudimą rekomenduotina sugriežtinti, tačiau ne pilna apimtimi, o sumažinant leistinų informacinės sklaidos platformų kiekį ir paliekant išimtinę teisę reklamuoti prekės ženklą.
Concerns persist that gambling companies with an established market position, supported by their extensive client base and influence, may acquire a competitive advantage over newcomer market entrants, thereby creating a risk of abuse of the existing situation. The objective of this Master‘s thesis is to assess whether, following the entry into force of such a ban, the principle of fair competition can continue to guarantee equal conditions for all gambling companies. The first chapter defines the fundamental values underlying the principle of fair competition and examines its application within national and European Union law. Based on the general theory definition, it has been established that the ultimate goal of competition rules should be to achieve “perfect competition”, which, in essence, signifies the complete freedom of economic operators to exercise their entrepreneurial activities. However, in practice, the full implementation of such a model is unattainable, as it could result in significant monopolistic and oligopolistic threats stemming from the potential abuse of market power by larger economic entities. As illustrated by the case of US v. Microsoft, uncontrolled economic activity can lead to outcomes where rivalry entities are unable to fully realise the freedoms guaranteed for the exercise of their economic activities. It has been determined that the principle of fair competition, as manifested through state authorities and public administration control, must function as a counterbalance to such risks, ensuring that competition rules, in a broad sense, serve all economic operators equally. The principle of fair competition, as an essential component of the national economy, is established in the Constitution of the Republic of Lithuania and other national legislation, and is further distinguished in the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court of Lithuania. Furthermore, this principle is also incorporated in the Preamble to the The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (hereinafter – TFEU) as an integral part of the functioning of the European Union’s free market economy. Additionally, it has been determined that the principle of fair competition, as derived from the TFEU and ensuring the proper functioning of competition in a broad sense, must ultimately serve for the interests of the consumer. Only in this particular manner can the following objectives be achieved:
- lowering market prices;
- encouraging better quality of goods and services;
- expanding the range of available goods and services;
- promoting innovation;
- enhancing competitiveness in global markets. It has been established that, under Directive (EU) 2019/1 of the European Parliament and of the Council, the institutions of the European Union are entitled to protect the interests of legal persons and consumers, even in cases where competition infringements are not directly linked to trade between the Member states. Moreover, beyond the correct interpretation of competition legislation, the European Union institutions are also obligated to actively promote and finance the development of relevant economic sectors essential for consumers. Second chapter analyses the reasons behind the amendments to the existing legal regulation of gambling advertising and assesses whether a total ban on gambling advertising is compatible with the fundamental value of economic freedom – fair competition. It has been established that gambling advertising cannot, by its nature, be considered prohibited, provided that it does not violate the principles of public welfare or constitute misleading practices. However, this is precisely where significant conflicts of opinion took place, as data indicate that even in the absence of direct encouragements to gamble, the mere presentation of gambling activities alongside advertisements casual activities associated with everyday life can, due to their reach among viewers, be regarded as harmful – particularly for minors and individuals suffering from gambling addiction. Moreover, following the introduction of partial advertising ban, gambling activities experienced a slight increase in popularity by several percentage points. It has been determined that the principle of fair competition would not be violated by its imposition of a total ban on gambling advertising; however, it is true that such a ban would restrict the freedom of fair competition, more specifically – the freedom of information. European Union Member States, including Belgium, Italy and Latvia, have already adopted these prohibitions of gambling advertising. Analysing the motivations behind these bans, it has been found that the primary legal goods pursued by all three countries are identical: the protection of public health and the safeguarding of minors and vulnerable groups of society. Further examination of the effects of such bans, based on the practical experience of Italy, revealed that a total ban on gambling advertising is not an entirely effective measure for achieving the intended objectives. Data shows that gambling companies have remained visible through subsidiary enterprises, and the number of individuals engaged in gambling activities remains significant. The third chapter attributes about the protected values that were undermined by the advertising of alcoholic products and tobacco, tobacco products and related products. In addition, the chapter provides a comprehensive assessment of gambling addiction in the broader context of alcohol, tobacco related products and narcotic substance addictions, and establishes the extent of gambling addiction within Lithuanian society. Upon completion of the research, it was established that a total ban on gambling advertising does not breach the principle of fair competition, but it does restrict the freedom of fair competition, thereby refuting the research hypothesis. The freedom of fair competition is not identical to the principle of fair competition. Based on the conducted analysis, it was determined that a total ban on gambling advertising is not an effective measure for reducing the number of individuals engaging in gambling or diminishing the overall impact of gambling on society. Therefore, it is proposed that, instead of imposing a total ban, efforts should be focused on educating Lithuanian society about the effects of gambling, utilising all available informational tools, and strengthening the treatment of gambling addiction. It is further recommended that the advertising ban be tightened, but not in its entirety – restricting the dissemination of information across certain platforms while preserving the exclusive right to advertise brand names.