Senior Croatian lawmakers have publicly criticised the country’s 2025 gambling law, contending that the legislation falls short on player protection, advertising limits and enforcement mechanisms, particularly regarding underage exposure to betting promotion. Their remarks mark an intensifying debate over how Croatia balances consumer safeguards with industry regulation as its legal framework evolves.
Speaking at a recent press event, legislators Božo Petrov and Marin Miletić highlighted what they see as practical shortcomings in the regulations, arguing that loopholes and lax enforcement have allowed gambling promotion to remain highly visible, even among minors.
Lawmakers Highlight Weak Player Protection and Marketing Gaps
Petrov and Miletić argued that aggressive betting marketing continues to permeate everyday life, despite formal limits in the new law. They stressed that betting company brands still appear prominently on sports jerseys and public sponsorships in ways that effectively normalise gambling for young people.
The lawmakers described how betting operators exploit unclear wording in the legislation to channel sponsorship budgets into sports and cultural events, rather than traditional broadcast advertising, circumventing the law’s intended restrictions. This shift, they said, undermines the law’s protective purpose by placing gambling brands in environments frequented by minors.
These criticisms echo long‑standing industry and civil society concerns about marketing’s role in shaping youth perceptions of wagering, especially where brand visibility intersects with sports and youth activities.
Enforcement Loopholes and Calls for Reform
Beyond advertising, lawmakers also cited major enforcement gaps and what they described as “sneaky legal loopholes” that dilute the effectiveness of key protections in the 2025 law. Critics argue that weak mechanisms for ensuring compliance have enabled operators to maintain broad outreach and that the state must tighten regulatory oversight and sanctions for violations.
These debates are taking place amid broader scrutiny of Croatia’s gambling reform process, including concerns raised by EU-level industry bodies over how regulatory changes were adopted and communicated and issues related to procedural compliance with EU notification obligations.
Advertising and Sponsorship: Youth Exposure Under Fire
A central plank of the criticism is the promotion of betting brands through sports sponsorships, which Petrov and Miletić said has led to widespread public exposure that the law was supposed to curb. They highlighted images of youth athletes wearing team shirts featuring gambling logos and argued that such visibility makes betting appear normal or desirable to younger audiences.
The lawmakers have called for clearer limits on indirect forms of gambling promotion, including sponsorships of teams, cultural groups, and community events, areas where advertisers have found loopholes in the current framework.
Next Steps: Reform Prospects and Stakeholder Pressure
As public criticism mounts, Croatian lawmakers are expected to push for amendments to the 2025 gambling law to close perceived gaps in underage exposure, advertising content and enforcement teeth. This could lead to renewed debate in the Croatian Parliament (Sabor) about the scope and substance of key provisions, especially as consumer protection advocates and industry representatives make their cases.
Whether the government will respond with substantive revisions remains unclear, but the political pressure highlights the high stakes of balancing responsible gaming, market competitiveness and public welfare in modern gambling frameworks.
Policy Implications for Croatia’s Gambling Market
The current debate is likely to shape Croatia’s regulatory trajectory as the market continues to mature. Strengthened protections, particularly around advertising transparency and youth safeguards, could influence how operators market products within the jurisdiction and how national regulators enforce compliance. Changes in this area will also be watched by EU peers, given the potential implications for cross‑border service provision, competitive fairness and regional harmonisation in gambling regulation.