Why the court provisionally suspended Colombia's online gambling advertising rules
The Council of State provisionally suspended the main advertising restrictions that Coljuegos imposed on online gambling operators in Colombia, removing spending caps, sanctions and the obligation to report marketing expenses, while the authority had until last Wednesday, 24 June, to file an application for reconsideration.
Colombia provisionally suspends advertising rule requiring operators to keep invoices for two years
In a compliance department in Bogotá, a spreadsheet had been updated every quarter for almost two years: columns recording every peso spent on marketing, every invoice from each media agency, and every contract with each supplier, all certified by an external auditor and available for submission to the regulator on request. On 11 June 2026, the Council of State rendered that spreadsheet effectively redundant.
The decision, signed by Counsellor Pablo Andrés Córdoba Acosta of Section One of the Administrative Contentious Chamber, ordered the provisional suspension of several core provisions of Resolution No. 20231000019054, the regulation that Coljuegos, the state entity that administers the gambling monopoly in Colombia, issued in October 2023 to regulate the advertising, sponsorship, promotion and commercial communications of online gambling operators. Juan Camilo Carrasco, managing partner at Sora Lawyers, a boutique firm specialising in gambling and technology law in Latin America, who also led the initiative, shared the relevant legal documents with SiGMA News and summarised the immediate effect: advertising spending caps ceased to be enforceable, the main sanctions were suspended, operators are no longer obliged to report their marketing expenses in detail and prior authorisation from Coljuegos is no longer required to transfer shares in the concessionaire company.
What the court found regarding the advertising cap
The provisional suspension order was issued in response to the request for interim measures filed by Juan Carlos Calvo Ospina, a lawyer on the SORA Lawyers team, as part of the annulment claim he had initially brought against Resolution No. 20231000019054. That case was later joined with another claim filed by lawyer Juan Pablo Cardona González. However, the suspension decision stemmed from the action brought by Juan Carlos Calvo Ospina, who argued that Coljuegos, the state company that administers the gambling monopoly in Colombia, had gone beyond what the law allows by setting limits on how much operators may spend on advertising, without there being an express legal authorisation to do so. The Council of State agreed, at least provisionally, starting with Article 6 of the resolution.
That article established that each operator could spend up to 20 per cent of its gross revenue on advertising, after deducting the amount it already transfers to the state for the right to operate. The problem, as the judicial decision noted, is that this formula produced markedly different amounts depending on each company’s size: smaller operators could spend less on advertising precisely when they most needed to invest to compete with larger firms. The court concluded that setting limits on what a company may spend on a lawful activity is something that only Congress can do through a law, not a regulator through an internal resolution, and that Coljuegos never had that authorisation.
A sanctions regime that the authority was not empowered to create
The sanctions section of the same article suffered the same fate. That part of the resolution (Article 9) had established three consequences for operators who violated the advertising rules:
- Preventing them from obtaining new operating licences if they were linked to unauthorised activities.
- Fining them 1.5 per cent of the value of their contract for any infringement.
- Cancelling their licence if they reoffend for a third time.
Carrasco noted that this provision most directly affected the risk faced by operators, and the court left no room for doubt in its analysis.
The Council of State found that Coljuegos had created a complete sanctions regime on its own: with defined conduct, specific consequences and an authority designated to apply them. The problem is that creating that kind of system, one that determines what can be sanctioned and how, is a power that in Colombia belongs exclusively to Congress.
The reporting duty that went beyond what the law allows
The suspension of Article 7 is likely to provide the most immediate relief to companies in the sector. That part of the resolution had required operators to submit to Coljuegos, each year, a detailed plan of how much they intended to spend on advertising, and it gave the authority the power to request, every three months, individual invoices for every expense, the signed contracts with each agency or media outlet, and a detailed description of how every peso had been used, all signed by the company’s auditor. As Carrasco explained when sharing the documents, the problem is that the law only gives Coljuegos oversight over one specific matter: verifying that operators are paying the State the correct amount for the right to operate. Nothing more.
The court drew a decisive distinction: the money operators transfer to the State as part of their licence, and the money they spend from their own pocket on advertising, are two very different things. The latter is private funds, and information about how it is spent, which agencies are hired and how much is paid to appear in each media outlet is protected by the Constitution as private commercial information. The Council of State cited a 2019 Constitutional Court ruling stating that, for the State to require a company to hand over its private documents, it needs a law that specifically authorises it and defines exactly for what purpose. After reviewing the applicable regulatory framework, no such law exists.
What remains in force and what must be resolved before Monday
Although several provisions of the resolution were suspended, Coljuegos retains a set of rules that the court found to be fully supported by law. The requirement that all advertising clearly identify which authorised operator is behind the advertisements remains in force because its purpose is to avoid public confusion over who is actually offering the service, rather than resolving disputes over registered trademarks.
The powers of Coljuegos’ illegal gambling enforcement department to act against those promoting unauthorised betting also survived, as that function was already backed by law before the resolution existed, as did the part of the sanctions regime that merely refers to existing legal procedures rather than creating new ones.
The obligation to seek Coljuegos’ approval before transferring the operating contract itself also remained intact, as public procurement law requires it regardless of the resolution. What was suspended was the requirement for shareholders of the operating company to obtain prior authorisation to sell their stakes, as the court found there was insufficient legal basis for it.
Coljuegos remained silent during the five days the court gave it to respond, without offering any arguments in its defence. The authority had until last Wednesday to file an appeal, but as of now, its submission has not been confirmed through the Council of State portal, Carrasco said when sharing the documents, and what it decides will determine whether the resolution represented a regulatory initiative that exceeded its legal limits or merely the opening round of a longer legal dispute.
This article was first published on the Spanish SiGMA News page on 26 June 2026.
In Mexico City, from September 1 to 3, 2026, North America meets Latin America. SiGMA North America welcomes 4,000 attendees for three days of business, insights, and inspiration for startups. Real insights. Real business. Book your spot.
