Casino compliance plans are as unique as the casino companies they protect. These plans are designed to identify and evaluate risks arising in the course of business that may negatively affect objectives in order to ensure sound and appropriate gaming control. The nature and source of these risks and the ways they are identified and evaluated are particular to each company, but all effective compliance plans share certain attributes, such as a sound compliance policy and clear lines of authority and reporting.
A good starting place for an effective compliance plan is well-reasoned and committed company compliance policy. The written policies should set out the reason for and objectives of the compliance plan, together with the purpose of the policies. Typically, the policies are designed to reinforce overall objectives of regulatory control, including that licensed gaming is to be conducted honestly and competitively, free from criminal and corruptive elements. While some policies branch out to cover compliance with a variety of laws, such as election laws and corrupt practices, in the context of gaming regulation the focus should be the timely identification and exclusion of unsuitable persons from gaming activities and the prevention, or prompt detection and correction, of unacceptable situations. The definitions of an unsuitable person and an unacceptable situation are helpful in focusing policies to meet company objectives.
An unsuitable person is defined as someone whom gaming authorities or company officials determine to be unfit to be associated with a gaming licensee. This may be a subjective decision; for example, barring an individual notorious for unsavory personal conduct or affairs. In certain circumstances, suitability may be determined more objectively, based on a prior denial of a gaming license or other regulatory approvals, felony convictions involving moral turpitude, gaming law, narcotics law, or any criminal-related activities. An unsuitable situation is any event or circumstance that may adversely affect the objectives of gaming control by diminishing the public faith in the ability of the gaming authorities to assure the honesty of the games and the integrity of the industry. Both objective and subjective criteria should be set forth in the compliance policies to identify unsuitable persons and activities.
Click here to view the rest of this article.