CPI: inspection of websites by Anatel has legal limitations, says superintendent

To ensure that the regulatory framework for betting works, it is necessary to remove online betting sites from the market that are outside the rules that regulate the activity. Another appropriate solution would be to expand the legal competence of the National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel), as a way of increasing supervision over the sector.

The assessment was made this Tuesday (3) by the superintendent of Supervision of the National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel), Gesilea Fonseca Teles, in testimony to the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry into the Manipulation of Games and Sports Betting (CPIMJAE).

Invited to testify at the commission, Gesilea explained to the senators Anatel’s role in the fight against irregular betting. She highlighted that the municipality actively participates in this process by helping the Ministry of Finance, which is the administrative authority that has the authority to indicate which websites should be blocked.

Gesilea highlighted that Anatel cannot decide which website should be blocked nor does it create a list. What the agency does is receive a list from the Ministry of Finance and, from there, communicates the telecommunications service providers that provide access to mobile or fixed internet.

“We communicate the decision that was made by the Ministry of Finance for these telecommunications operators to block specific websites previously listed by the ministry. It is very important to understand the role of Anatel. Anatel does not carry out an investigation, it does not go after which website is legal or illegal, it simply has the authority to notify internet access providers that they block previously listed websites”, he clarified.

Gesilea also pointed out the agility in communication between Anatel and the Ministry of Finance.

“Communication between Anatel and the Ministry of Finance is quick. As soon as we receive the list, we immediately launch communication, passing the information on to all providers”, he explained.

Anatel’s superintendent also stated that the agency deals with more than 20 thousand internet access providers in Brazil.

“We have to communicate to all of them that sites a, b or c must be blocked. After this communication, we can run tests to confirm whether this blockade is being effective. As the number of providers is very large, we focus on the largest providers, which represent more than 80% of the internet access market”, he detailed.

Expansion of skills

Gesilea also told senators that accessing the internet through a virtual private network (VPN) still constitutes a challenge for supervision.

“When you use a virtual private network, there is a connection that is encrypted between a user and the server. When this type of connection occurs, the user disappears from where he physically is and is considered to be located where the VPN is. So, if the user wants to circumvent a blocking order here in Brazil, he can connect to a VPN abroad and, for all intents and purposes, this user is abroad. So, he can bypass this location and escape the blockades”, he stated.

The Anatel superintendent acknowledged that the VPN “really is a technological challenge” and represents “a facility that users can use to try to circumvent the system”.

“Anatel would have to intensify tools, it would have to have more budget and it would have to have more dedicated people to eventually try to implement a better search, a solution for this type of VPN. The issue that arises is not even the technical difficulty of doing so. The question that arises is that Anatel’s competence does not apply to the internet, and this is what limits all our action when we deal with bets.”

Gesilea further explained that Anatel, by law, only regulates the telecommunications service, which does not include content that is on the internet.

“Anatel regulates telecommunications service providers, it does not regulate Google, it does not regulate websites, it cannot limit which websites can or cannot be accessed. So, for reasons of legal competence, Anatel cannot go beyond receiving a list from the Ministry of Finance and passing this list of prohibited sites to the operators, so that they can block them”, he said.

Also read

Ministry of Communications will define use of auction resources

Until then, strategic technical projects had been discussed and defined by working groups of the National Telecommunications Agency (Anatel)

Website blocking

In response to Senator Jorge Kajuru (PSB-GO)who presides over the CPI, Gesilea highlighted that Anatel, in its continuous and daily interaction with the Ministry of Finance, has already helped block over 5,250 websites, identified by the ministry itself.

“If there is an unblocking order for any reason, we also receive this order and inform the telecommunications operators. We have no record of non-compliance with these lockdown orders. Anatel follows. If there were any non-compliance, the providers could even be subject to losing the grant, of course within a process with broad defense and contradiction”, he said.

Gesilea also stated that the providers have been “completely cooperative” in complying with legal requirements.

“As soon as they receive the blocking orders, they carry out the blocking without any questioning, we realize that there is no resistance, they are all committed to complying with the legal orders, to complying with the orders that are issued in these specific cases by the Ministry of Finance, there really is a system of cooperation”, he reported.

In response to the vice-president of the CPI, senator Eduardo Girão (Novo-CE)Gesilea highlighted that there has not yet been any fine or opening of a sanctioning process to investigate the non-blocking of a bet that has been ordered by the Ministry of Finance. She also highlighted that the General Telecommunications Law provides for fines with a ceiling of R$50 million per infraction.

“What we can do today is just tell operators which sites should be blocked. We cannot give operators a white list to block anything. The Internet Civil Rights Framework does not allow this kind of thing. We have to have a list, and it is not a list defined by us. Due to the Bets Law, it is the Ministry of Finance who has to define it”, he argued.

ACCESS NOW