Philippine Chief Justice angrily denounces the "double standards" in gambling laws: street gambling faces heavy penalties, while national casinos thrive.

Philippine Supreme Court Justice Marvic Leonen recently pointed out in a concurring opinion on an acquittal that there is a severe class inequality in the current Philippine gambling law enforcement system. He criticized the government for "always targeting the poor," while the officially led gambling industry makes huge profits under legal cover, which is unacceptable.

The poor are sentenced for tossing coins, while government casinos earn tens of billions of pesos annually.

Leonen noted that although the law repeatedly claims that gambling is a "social cancer" that corrodes the will of the people, the government itself actively participates in the gambling industry through the state gambling company PAGCOR, including casino operations, electronic games, bingo games, cockfighting live broadcasts, and even offshore gambling.

He sternly questioned: "If gambling is inherently evil, why does the government personally enter the field and profit from it?"

According to official data, by the end of 2021, PAGCOR had generated over 32.6 billion pesos from various gambling businesses, of which about 3 billion from offshore gambling had not yet been collected. Faced with such financial gains, the state still chases after small gambling behaviors on the streets, and the enforcement standards obviously have serious biases.

Is tossing coins also a crime? The Supreme Court finally overturns the conviction.

The case involved two men who were arrested by the police for playing "cara y cruz" (a coin-tossing game) on the street and charged with illegal gambling. Previously, the three lower courts had found the two men guilty and sentenced them to a maximum of three years in prison, until the Supreme Court finally reversed the decision on appeal, ruling that the evidence was insufficient for a conviction.

The court pointed out that the police failed to prove the specific amount of gambling money, its use, or confirm whether there was real betting behavior during the enforcement process, and also failed to clearly define the roles of the organizers and participants of the gambling, obviously not meeting the elements of the crime of illegal gambling.

Leonen: "Making money" should not determine legality.

In the concurring opinion, Leonen frankly stated that the state's attitude towards gambling issues is "contradictory." He said, "The state itself runs casinos to make money but punishes civilians' minor gambling behaviors, just because the latter cannot contribute to fiscal revenue. This is not the justice of the law, but a blatant interest orientation."

He called for the state, if it considers gambling to be harmful to society, to uniformly prohibit it, rather than implementing selective enforcement based on class and interests. Otherwise, "the so-called justice is just a fig leaf for the ruling class to cover their own narratives."