[bsa_pro_ad_space id=1 lien=même] [bsa_pro_ad_space id=2]

Aller au contenu

Législation

Paraguay – L'Office des jeux de hasard va lancer un appel d'offres pour les paris sportifs terrestres et en ligne

By - 6 septembre 2022

The National Gaming Commission (Conajzar) has opened the call for Public Tender No. 01/2022, which will grant a license for sports betting.

In a statement Conajzar announced that the tender will take place from September 13 to September 19, 2022. Potential operators will need to pay a fee of 60,000,000 guaraníes in order to take part in the bidding process which is non refundable. Only one operator will be granted a licence.    

The formal opening of bids will take place at the Conajzar Offices on October 31. 

Les paris sportifs sont autorisés par les lois sur les jeux du Paraguay qui date de 1997. Autrefois, les paris sportifs étaient limités à un seul endroit rattaché à un hippodrome. L'expansion a commencé en 2015 après que la CONAJZAR a annoncé qu'un appel d'offres pour les paris sportifs serait lancé dans un avenir proche, alors que le conseil d'administration commençait à réfléchir à l'ouverture du marché. Depuis lors, les paris sportifs au Paraguay ont fait leurs preuves extrêmement controversé.

La société locale Daruma Sam a obtenu le droit exclusif de proposer des paris sportifs avant la dernière Coupe du monde Fifa for five years. Under the terms of the contract Sam Daruma had the obligation to open as many as 200 sports betting shops throughout Paraguay. In February 2018, the Comptroller General of the Republic of Paraguay (CGR) recommended that the bidding process for sports betting be declared void.

Three complaints were put forward alleging that the bidding process had been prepared with the intention of favouring one of the participants over the others. Accusations alleged that the tender had been stacked in favour of Daruma Sam SA which has ties to local government officials as well as members of the gaming board itself, according to local news sources. The CGR had also argued that the tender was monopolistic in design and was therefore incompatible with the constitution.

Partage via
Copier le lien