30-03-2007 WTO report confirms the US have failed to comply with earlier WTO's ruling

A three-member WTO compliance panel said the United States have ignored the recommendations of the WTO's Dispute Settlement Body which in April 2005 said Washington could maintain a ban on internet gambling to "protect public order and public morals" as long as the same restrictions against foreign operators are applied to domestic operators that offer remote betting on horse racing.

The latest WTO report notes that Antigua demonstrated that a flourishing remote account wagering industry exists in the United States in ostensible legality, despite US claims that it prohibits all remote gambling throughout the country. As a matter of fact, the United States did not remove the ambiguity between legalized betting on horse racing across state borders and bans on other forms of remote gambling.

With respect to the US law that created this ambiguity, the 1978 Interstate Horseracing Act, the WTO panel stated that it would appear that the language of the statute allows interstate remote gambling notwithstanding the Wire Act. The Wire Act itself does not prohibit remote gambling within the United States and leaves to each individual state the option to permit or to prohibit intrastate remote gambling.

"It vindicates all that we have been saying for years about the discriminatory trade practices of the United States in this area, and we look forward to the United States opening its markets," said Dr Errol Cort, Antigua's Finance Ministry.

"This is a smashing success for Antigua in every possible way. The report will sweep away any lingering doubt that Antigua has obtained a clear and convincing win over the United States in this matter," added John W. Ashe, Antigua's Ambassador to the WTO.

Mark Mendel, Antigua’s legal advisor, said that although the United States will most likely appeal to the WTO’s Appellate Body, the compliance panel’s reasoning is largely unassailable.

"While it is possible that the Appellate Body may have language of its own or dilute some of the findings in one way or another, it is extremely unlikely that the key findings will be changed in any material respect. The appeal, if there is one, will take about three months, so we can expect a final resolution of the issue sometime in the summer," said Mendel.