Our editorial purpose
We publish plain-language information for people in Brunei who want to understand gambling-related websites, payment risks, legal references and available reporting routes. The aim is to help readers assess evidence rather than to tell them that a particular service is safe, approved or suitable.
Each item is prepared for a defined market and language setting. We avoid treating a brand name, a web address or a promotional statement as proof of identity, authorisation or lawful operation. When the available record does not answer a question, we say so directly.
How we use sources
Our starting point is the source record available for the subject being discussed. We give priority to primary material from a competent public authority. For Brunei-related legal and regulatory context, our recorded authorities include the Attorney General’s Chambers text of the Common Gaming Houses Act, Chapter 28, guidance from the Authority for Info-communications Technology Industry, and information published by the Brunei Darussalam Central Bank.
The Act is used as a legal source for its direct wording. It is not rewritten as a personal legal opinion. AITI’s content-regulation information is used for its recorded mapping of online gambling to the Common Gaming Houses Act and the Royal Brunei Police Force. AITI’s frequently asked questions are used for the recorded direction on relevant criminal reports and police hotline 993.
The BDCB alert-list search is treated narrowly. It is a searchable warning resource for suspicious or unlicensed financial entities; it is not treated as a casino-licence register. Absence from that list therefore does not establish that a gambling service is licensed, lawful or safe.
Evidence labels and wording
We distinguish four kinds of information in our working records:
| Information type | How it is described |
|---|---|
| Primary record | Information taken from an identified authority or official record, with its date and scope retained. |
| Operator statement | A claim made by a service or its representative. It is not presented as independently verified unless a primary record supports it. |
| User report | An individual account or public complaint. It may indicate a concern, but does not by itself prove misconduct or a general service outcome. |
| Unknown or unresolved | A matter for which the supplied evidence is incomplete, conflicting or not sufficiently specific. |
Our wording follows the evidence. “The record states” is reserved for what a source actually says. “The operator claims” identifies a statement from the service. “A user reported” identifies an allegation or experience without turning it into a proven fact. Where a complaint has not been established by a dated competent-source record, we do not call it confirmed wrongdoing.
Legal and regulatory boundaries
Gambling law can depend on facts that are not available in a public summary, including the activity, location, person involved and relevant conduct. We therefore avoid giving an individual legal conclusion. A reference to the Common Gaming Houses Act Chapter 28 is a reference to the supplied legal text, not a substitute for advice from a qualified professional or an official authority.
We also keep authority roles separate. AITI material is used for its stated information about online content and reporting. The BDCB alert list is used only within the scope recorded for that list. Neither source is presented as a universal register of casino approvals. A site’s appearance, advertising, payment options or claimed licence is not enough for us to label it authorised.
For wider legal context, readers may consult licence and law information. That information should be read together with the original authority material linked in the relevant record.
Reviews, brands and commercial influence
A brand review is not an endorsement. We do not describe a service as reliable, legal or risk-free merely because it has a recognisable name, an active domain or positive promotional material. We do not invent testing results, withdrawal experiences, customer-service conversations, payment methods, corporate details or licence numbers.
Where a commercial relationship exists elsewhere on the site, it does not change the evidence standard. Editorial conclusions are not sold, exchanged for favourable wording or based on a promised reader outcome. A commercial link cannot be used as proof of regulatory status. This route contains no commercial call to action.
Complaints, warnings and corrections
We handle complaints cautiously. A report may be relevant context, but it remains an allegation unless a dated, competent-source record establishes the underlying event. We do not publish personal data unnecessarily, encourage harassment or reproduce unverified accusations as fact. We may summarise a concern when it is material, attributable and clearly labelled.
Readers who identify a factual error can use our contact route. A useful correction includes the exact statement, the affected location, the reason it is inaccurate and a source that can be checked. We review corrections against the original record and may amend, qualify or remove wording. A request to change an accurate statement is not automatically accepted.
For a structured overview of concerns and warning signals, see complaints and scam warnings. That information does not replace a report to the appropriate authority.
Reporting criminal concerns
We are not an emergency service, investigator or enforcement body. A serious concern should be taken to the authority identified for that type of matter. The supplied AITI frequently asked questions direct relevant criminal reports to the Royal Brunei Police Force and identify police hotline 993. Use official channels for current instructions and urgent assistance.
Do not send passwords, payment credentials or unnecessary identity documents through an editorial contact form. If money or account access may be at risk, contact the relevant financial provider using its verified channel and preserve records such as dates, transaction references and correspondence. We cannot promise recovery or determine liability.
Updating and dating information
Regulatory pages, legal materials and warning lists can change. Our source records include a checking date so readers can distinguish a recorded review from a current official decision. The supplied authorities for this policy were checked on 2 September 2026. That date records when the sources were checked; it does not mean that every underlying fact remains unchanged afterward.
When sources conflict, we do not silently choose the more convenient claim. We identify the conflict, narrow the wording or mark the point unresolved until a suitable record is available. A changed domain, entity name or ownership claim may require a fresh identity check rather than a simple text update.
Questions about this policy
Does the BDCB alert list show which casinos are licensed?
No. In our records it is a searchable alert list for suspicious or unlicensed financial entities, not a casino-licence register. We do not infer approval from either presence on, or absence from, that list.
Are user complaints treated as proof?
No. A user report is recorded as a report or allegation unless a dated competent-source record establishes the underlying claim. We consider context, attribution and corroboration before publishing it.
Does a brand review provide legal advice?
No. It provides evidence-led information and identifies limits in the available record. The Common Gaming Houses Act Chapter 28 and related authority material should not be treated as personalised legal advice.
Where should a relevant criminal report go?
The supplied AITI FAQ points relevant criminal reports to the Royal Brunei Police Force and identifies hotline 993. Confirm current reporting instructions through official channels.
Can I request a correction?
Yes. Send the statement, its location, an explanation and a checkable source through our contact route. We assess the request against the source record and may correct or qualify the wording.