About this app
What is Let It Spin?
A private members’ bill, 2026/009, was put forward on 20 January by 23 deputies and referred to the General Legislation Committee on 29 January. It would amend the 1974 decree-law to prohibit all online gambling and require internet and payment providers to block it.
MP Yasser Gourari, one of the deputies promoting the measure, told Diwan FM that the bill provides for fines of MAD10,000 to MAD500,000 and prison terms of one to five years. Penalties rise where there is recidivism, involvement of minors or suspicion of money laundering.
He described online gambling and betting as a “social scourge“. Some people, he said, “after repeated losses and financial difficulties, have been driven to despair, sometimes to the point of contemplating suicide”.
About Let It Spin
Peter Kesitilwe, CEO of the AiA, added: “SmartSoft already has significant exposure to African markets, and we look forward to working with their team on issues ranging from B2B licensing and market access to responsible gaming, channelisation and sustainable regulation.”
The AiA said this was the latest example of its objective of bringing industry stakeholders into “constructive dialogue” as Africa’s gambling market develops.
“Our aim is to create an environment in which regulators, operators and suppliers can engage constructively on the opportunities and challenges facing the industry across the continent,” Kesitilwe stated.
About Let It Spin
George Hasselback is done with Imperial Pacific International (IPI). The attorney has been representing the controversial and incompetent casino operator as it defended itself in a lawsuit filed by Fox Financial, as well as others, but has now washed his hands and stepped away. He had filed a request to withdraw from representing the company on February 12, and a judge granted his petition yesterday. Magistrate Judge Heather Kennedy agreed with Hasselback in his assertion that continued representation would put him in an ethical conundrum.
Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”
Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.
