Gambling halls near schools: the legal vacuum in the Canary Islands

A crack between regulations and permits

In the Canary Islands, game rooms must be located 300 meters from schools.

The key to the case is in the premises that they already had a registered application or prior authorization when the distance rules changed. The controversy does not stem from an absence of regulation, but from how the new rule was applied to procedures that were already active.

The minimum distance to schools sets a clear limit, but Its effect depends on when the license was requested , what stage the file was in and what value the prior authorizations retained. This difference can alter the result even if the meter limit already appears in the regulations.

The opening of premises next to educational centers despite the tightening of restrictions focused on previous files . Some procedures had been initiated before the change and other permits remained in force during the regulatory transition.

In the Canary Islands, the separation between schools and child care centers is set at 300 meters for casinos, bingos, game rooms and betting shops. The objective is that these businesses are not part of the daily environment of children and adolescents.

The situation changes when that distance does not apply equally to all cases . A salon with an application already registered or with prior authorization may follow a different path than a new opening. The legal vacuum in the Canary Islands lies in this imbalance.

The distance exists, but Its scope depends on how the procedures are reviewed that were already underway. If they are left out of the new filter, the rule can stop future openings and, at the same time, allow premises next to schools under previous authorizations.

The minimum distance and its gray areas

The minimum distance to schools has become a common tool in the regulation of gaming halls. Its function is reduce the presence of these businesses on streets linked to educational centers.

The application, however, requires several details to be specified. It is necessary to establish from what access it is measured, what educational centers they count, how the records are updated, what happens with transfers and What protection do prior authorizations maintain? .

In the Canary archipelago, This protection coexists with other territorial limits . The gambling law in the Canary Islands It also regulates the concentration of establishments to avoid accumulations in the same area. Within this framework comes the separation of 200 meters between recreational and game rooms, and between these premises and the bingo halls.

Canary Islands compared to other autonomous models

The Canary Islands case is located on a very unequal regional map. Andalusia set 150 meters for new openings close to schools and institutes. The Valencian Community raised the distance to 850 meters, one of the highest restrictions and with judicial support.

Auckland has followed a more progressive path, with controls, reforms and adaptation periods before tightening the implementation of these premises. The comparison helps to understand the scope of the debate. The number matters, but It is not enough if each license is not reviewed with criteria clear.

When a reform does not properly resolve previous files, open applications or possible transfers, even a demanding restriction may fall short . The meter limit only works if the administrative procedure does not open exceptions.

Protection of minors and public responsibility

The proximity of a classroom to a school It does not imply that children and adolescents can enter , because access is prohibited. Even so, the protection of minors It doesn't end at admission control.

Also important is the presence of the premises on passing streets, the visibility of its signs and exposure to the game in an educational environment. That dimension turns the case into a matter of social impact , as well as administrative.

Legal certainty is necessary, but it should not serve to maintain exceptions that contradict a preventive measure. The review of previous permits, pending applications and transfers will be key to that the limit does not remain in a merely formal protection in Canarian school environments.

Share article X.com LinkedIn Facebook

What do you think? Join the conversation!

Cancel reply