Gambling is criminalised in Malaysia, unless its betting on licensed sweepstakes, horse racing in the three turf clubs or at a certain highland resort casino.
Some private clubs are also licensed to offer slot machines and card games to members. But strictly off limits are sports betting and domestically-operated online gambling.
Even gambling at home, a family festivity bonding tradition, is prohibited, but many merrily play on anyway, as long as neighbours aren't riled up.
The legal gambling industry is gargantuan: projected revenue for 2017-2027 is RM1.3 billion to RM3.6 billion. No wonder illegal gamers scoop a huge piece of the action while risking cat-and-mouse games with the police to gobble up takings valued at a conservative RM3 billion annually, measured roughly against the government's estimated loss in tax revenue.
Malaysians are such incorrigible gamblers that they prefer illegal establishments over legitimate outfits because the "bad boys" parlay enticing odds and winnings.
With conventional but illegal gambling primarily curbed, what are bettors and high-rollers to do? Turn to global online gambling, where betting is comfortably accessible, provided punters play on the reliable sites.
Technically, online gambling is illegal, according to the obsolete Betting Act of 1953 and the Common Gaming House Act, but police can't act against cyberspace betting operators for this loophole: Malaysia has no jurisdiction over foreign-hosted websites.
Of course, the convenient alternative is to block them, about 6,400 in recent years, but there's nothing a decent virtual private network subscription can't circumvent.
That's why it was curious for Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail to reveal in Parliament that political patronage prevented the authorities from acting against illegal online gambling.
Saifuddin did not define or elaborate, except that the political patronage simply "exists".
In the first place, the idea of "illegal" online gambling is superfluous: operations steer clear of legal jurisdictions or operations are based in nations where gambling is legitimate.
Still, Saifuddin provided meagre details on what he prescribes as the "illegal online gambling scene". As for that political patronage imputation, we are intrigued: how does this racket work? We expect clarity soon.
We understand if political patronage means forestalling police raids on brick-and-mortar gambling dens and casinos, or shielding illegal computer servers in Kuala Lumpur. But we are perplexed as to how political patronage protects Saifuddin's version of the "illegal" global online threat.
Nevertheless, he conceded that in Malaysia, it is a "major constraint" faced by the authorities in acting against illegal online sites.
If that's the case, a simple query: what's holding up the minister from identifying operators protected by said patronage and instituting punitive measures?