DECISION

As part of Mineskis duty to promote Electronic Sports here in South East

Asia, it also has the concurrent duty to discipline violators thereof. This Decision
concludes the investigation with regard to the #322 or match-fixing scandal.

In imposing the proper penalty, the organization has the burden of proof to
show that the accused committed the offense charged. What is at stake here is the
future of the players and of the E-Sports community. The organization cannot
simply rely on unverified evidence that can be easily manufactured. It is also
common occurrence in E-Sports that gulong moments happen. The momentum
of the game can easily shift from one side to another and an upset does not by itself
prove that a match was fixed. As such, an improbable loss of one team must be
corroborated by additional evidence to show that the match was fixed.

To be guilty of match-fixing the following elements must be present:

1) An agreement between a player and another player or between a player and a
third person to fix a match. Match fixing is considered as any type of
agreement to pre-determine the result which may include but is not limited
to throwing the match;

2) Valuable consideration or something that is worth of value;

3) Consummation of the offense

All of the elements are present in this case. The first element is present
because an agreement between a player and a third person to fix a match. This fact
can be shown from the admissions of the accused and also from the numerous
screenshots which were later on proved to be authentic. It is worthy to note that
screen shots of a conversation between two people do not by itself prove that the
players agreed to fix the match. Even the Youtube video claiming the authenticity
of the conversation cannot by itself prove the same. There must be solid proof that
each of the accused actually consented to fix the match. Conversations between
two non-players are simply circumstantial.

Further, while this case is not a criminal proceeding, the investigation of this
matter must be akin to one. The maximum penalty to be imposed (lifetime ban) is
analogous to the worst of criminal penalties. In a professional gamers
perspective, to be banned from a game they are passionate about tantamount to the
end of their professional life. Thus the organization must weigh the evidence
objectively and even recognize the constitutional right of the accused to
presumption of innocence.

The organization is aware of how easy it is steal identities in the internet and
the difficulty to prove who the actual person was who used the online account at
the time of the offense. While the argument that the accuseds account was hacked
is merely self-serving, the investigation committee still has the burden of proof
without reasonable doubt that it is the same person who used the online account.
This defense became nugatory when 8 of the accused came out and admitted to the
offense charged. They also positively identified the people involved including
Michael Vallejos and Jonathan Radores. Thus, the identities of the accused are no
longer an issue and the alibi of being hacked cannot prevail over the positive
identification of the other co-accused.

The second element of the offense is present because of the money or online
currency such as DOTA 2 items received by the accused. The organization
recognizes that DOTA 2 items can also be converted to real cash and that these
items have value akin to real currency. It has been proven to the investigation
committee that the accused, through multiple smurf accounts, placed their bets to
the pre-determined winning team.

The third element is present because the matches in question were actually
thrown. As admitted by 8 of the accused, they intentionally fixed the game by
either intentionally losing or by giving undue advantage to the opposing team.
Specifically the games are (1) MSIEvoGT v. Mineski (2) MSIEvoGT v. Awake
and (3) Mineski v. Immunity.

Sanctions

After careful analysis of the evidence presented and of the circumstances
present, the organization has decided to sanction the players with a 1 year ban from
all MPGL tournaments. The committee took into consideration the landmark
decision of Starladder in banning Solo and the breach of contract case of Kimo and
Ewe.

Ordinarily, match-fixing would warrant a lifetime ban in participating in
future tournaments. However, the organization has decided to take into
consideration the following mitigating circumstances in determining the proper
penalty namely: (1) the voluntary admission of guilt by the accused, (2) resignation
of the accused from their respective teams, and (3) the minority of one of the
accused.

Voluntary admission of guilt and resignation of their teams

When the accused were invited to give their side of the story, 8 of the
accused immediately admitted their involvement with the match-fixing. Each of
the 8 accused resigned from their respective teams and extended their apologies to
the community. The admission of guilt by the accused is an act of repentance and
respect for the law; it indicates moral disposition in the accused, favorable to his
reform. Even in criminal proceedings, admission of guilt mitigates the imposable
penalty thus the organization adopts such rationale in this instance.

Without the admission of the accused, the investigation committee would
have to overcome a myriad of technical, practical, and legal burdens to impose the
proper penalty. Thus, while public clamor demands for a lifetime ban, a more
judicious penalty would be a one year ban.

Minority of Mark Anthony Soriano

The organization takes into account the capacity of discernment of minors at
the time of the offense. Discernment means the capacity of the child at the time of
the commission of the offense to understand the differences between right and
wrong and the consequences of the wrongful act. As a minor, Jacko Soriano
cannot fully discern what is right and wrong and the consequences of his wrongful
act. Thus, Mark Anthony Jacko Soriano is sanctioned with a nine (9) month ban
to all MPGL tournaments.

Other circumstances

The committee also recognizes that the match-fixing did not occur during
the events conducted by our local organizers (MPGL/PPC/TNC/ESL) and that
there are no rules for match-fixing with corresponding penalties for these events.
The committee also recognizes the principle in criminal law where there is no
crime and no punishment without a pre-existing penal law (Nullum crimen sine
lege). However, this does erase the fact that an offense was made. The committee
needs to rectify this wrong and will still impose the corresponding sanctions.


Retribution

As for the remaining accused namely Michael Vallejos and Jonathan
Radores, the investigation has concluded that they are the masterminds of the
match-fixing scandal thus the organization shall not only impose a lifetime ban on
them but will also file the appropriate criminal actions against them if needed.
Their actions have severely tarnished the reputation of E-Sports in South East Asia.
Thus, the organization asks that the community continuously send any additional
evidence to support the already strong case it has against the two. The filing of the
criminal complaints shall serve as a strong warning against future violators that the
organization will not tolerate any act that will deter the growth of the E-Sports
community.

As a warning to whosoever affiliates themselves with the banned players in
any form of E-Sports competition will also be sanctioned with the following:
1st offense: 6 months ban
2nd offense: 12 months ban
3rd offense: 18 months ban
Affiliation here means but is not limited to being teammates, coaching, or
managing. Further, the sanctions accumulate if an already banned person is caught
while serving his sentence.
While the jurisdiction of this committee in imposing the sanction is limited
to MPGL events, this Decision is with the concurrence between Mineski, TNC,
PeSO, Pacific, ESL Ph, and Joebert Yu during the meeting held on October 28,
2014.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the accused namely Joven Pancho, Richard
Minowa, Jo Tan, Carlo Rivera, Mark Gavin, Denver Miranda, and Patrick Pascua
are sanctioned with a one (1) year ban from all MPGL tournaments. Accused
Mark Anthony Jacko Soriano is sanctioned with a nine (9) month ban from all
MPGL tournaments. Accused Michael Vallejos and Jonathan Radores are
permanently banned from all MPGL tournaments with a ban to all players who
associate themselves with the two.