Okada firm sues casino owner before DOJ

MANILA, Philippines - Japanese billionaire Kazuo Okada’s Tiger Resort Leisure & Entertainment Inc. has lodged with the Department of Justice (DOJ) a criminal complaint for defamation against its former business partner Stephen Wynn.

In a statement, Tiger Resorts said its filing of a complaint stemmed from a press release posted by Wynn Resorts on its official website on Feb. 19 accusing Okada of engaging in illegal activities.

Wynn and Okada are embroiled in one of the most bitter corporate feuds the international gambling industry has seen.

The feud started when the Japanese pachinko businessman questioned the $135-million donation pledged by Wynn Macau Limited, a Macau subsidiary of Wynn Resorts in Macau. Both businessmen continue to trade barbs, accusing the other of questionable payments to public officials in Asia.

Okada’s Universal Entertainment Corp. was accused of giving a $5-million bribe to Rodolfo Soriano, a close associate of the former head of the Philippine Amusement & Gaming Corp.

The payment was allegedly made via a shell company in Hong Kong and was part of $40 million in transfers made by Universal’s US affiliate Aruze that are now subject of various investigations by law enforcement and regulators in the US and Asia.

It was made at a time when Universal was lobbying for concessions for its casino from the previous Arroyo administration.

Okada was also accused of giving a visiting Philippine gambling regulator and his entourage free use of the Wynn Macau casino-’s Villa 81 – a 7,000-square-foot $6,000 a night pleasure palace whose amenities include his-and-hers bathrooms with showers built to accommodate six people at a time.

Okada said the Feb. 19 statement released globally by Wynn Resorts contained libelous accusations against him, his associates and companies such as Universal Entertainment Corp., and Aruze USA Inc.

Okada’s group cited the Primer on Cybercrime issued by the Department of Justice on Nov. 26, which provides that “cybercrime-related cases are dealt with using existing laws.” 

“This means that Internet libel may be ‘dealt with’ or prosecuted under the existing provisions of the Republic on libel,” Okada said.