The Malta Gaming Authority (MGA) has published its AI Gaming Charter, a voluntary set of principles for how gaming licensees design, buy and run artificial intelligence systems. The regulator released the document on 18 September 2026, developed jointly with the Malta Digital Innovation Authority (MDIA).
The Charter creates no new legal duties. The document states that it “is voluntary in nature and does not create new legal or regulatory obligations.” The MGA says it sits alongside existing law, including the EU Artificial Intelligence Act (Regulation (EU) 2024/1689) and the GDPR, and is aimed at the practical questions licensees face when AI touches player protection, fraud detection, customer contact and operational decisions.
Four months from consultation to publication
The MGA opened a targeted consultation on the draft Charter on 8 May 2026. According to the regulator, the final text also draws on sector-wide surveys and targeted discussions with licensees.
“The AI Gaming Charter reflects a shared commitment between regulators, industry and technology experts to promote the responsible and transparent use of artificial intelligence,” said Charles Mizzi, CEO of the MGA.
Kenneth Brincat, CEO of the MDIA, tied the document to accountability inside operators.
“Trust is fundamental to the responsible adoption of AI. As its use becomes increasingly embedded across the gaming sector, organisations need practical ways to understand where AI is being used, manage the associated risks and ensure that accountability and human oversight remain firmly in place,” Brincat said.
What the Charter asks of licensees
The Charter is split into principle areas, each with its own list of commitments. The ones with the most direct impact on day-to-day operations are below.
Transparency and explainability
Players should be told they are dealing with an AI system “at latest from the point of first interaction.” Licensees are asked to keep logs in proportion to a system’s risk, with detailed traceability for higher-impact systems, to document the datasets used for training and validation, and to give meaningful explanations where an AI output materially affects a person. The Charter also warns against “AI washing“, meaning overstating what a system can do or how autonomously it works. Licensees should also be able to hand algorithmic transparency documentation to the MGA on request.
Fairness and bias
AI-driven decisions should not produce unjustified discrimination. The Charter names proxy variables that can carry bias into player-facing models, including geolocation, deposit patterns and device type. It asks adopters to monitor outputs continuously, give affected users a route to redress, and carry out fundamental rights impact assessments where appropriate.
Human oversight and governance
Humans should keep control over AI decisions, and accountability for AI-driven outcomes should be documented. Licensees are asked to train staff, set up a formal AI governance structure, run AI system impact assessments and use external audits where appropriate. The Charter also asks adopters to notify the MGA and MDIA of incidents and regulatory concerns.
Adoption is self-directed. The document describes no public register or sign-up process. Licensees that adopt it are “encouraged to designate one or more responsible individuals,” drawn from compliance, data, technology or AI functions, to act as internal points of contact.
The remaining sections cover data protection and security, reliability and safety testing, reporting metrics and environmental sustainability, including energy use and the carbon footprint of AI services.
Where AI already sits in Malta’s gaming sector
The Charter maps current use across licensees. It lists customer support chatbots, recommendation engines, player profiling, fraud detection and AML, and responsible gambling behavioural models among the more established applications. KYC and onboarding, payments and player acquisition are described as at testing or early-deployment stage, while dynamic odds setting, risk management and regulatory reporting see limited adoption so far.
Several of those uses carry direct player-harm risk. A model that flags at-risk players, or one that decides who receives a bonus offer, can protect or target the same customer depending on how it is built and supervised. The fairness and oversight sections apply directly to those systems. Rules-based automation and robotic process automation fall outside scope because they do not meet the AI Act’s definition of an AI system.
Other regulators are also looking at AI in gambling. In the UK, the Advertising Standards Authority recently banned a Midnite TikTok ad over an AI-generated character that appeared to be under 25.
What comes next
The Charter is labelled version 1 and sets no review date. Its practical weight will depend on two things: how many MGA licensees choose to adopt it, and whether the MGA’s supervisory teams start referring to it in compliance reviews, even without a legal basis to enforce it.
For operators, the binding pressure comes from Brussels. AI Act obligations, including those for high-risk systems, apply on a phased timetable, and a licensee that builds its governance to the Charter’s standard now will already hold some of the documentation the Act requires. The MGA has given the industry a template. Whether it becomes the de facto benchmark for Malta-licensed B2C and B2B companies is the question for the next 12 months.
Source: Malta Gaming Authority
