搜索
查看: 3060|回复: 2

有权威人士质疑PAGCOR的合法性

[复制链接]

33

主题

116

帖子

9

菲华币

菲华精英

Rank: 4

积分
566
发表于 2017-1-10 22:51:53 | 显示全部楼层 |阅读模式
Mahal naming Pangulong Rody:
我们尊敬的总统罗迪,

Malugod na pagbati!
真挚的问候!

Una sa lahat ako po ay lubos na nagpapasalamat sa inyo na kami sa ATM ay inyong tinanggap bilang kakampi sa laban at pagpupunyagi ng sambayanang Pilipino sa ating dakilang adhikain na makapaglatag ng isang magandang kinabukasan para sa ating mga anak at sa mga henerasyong susunod sa kanila.
首先,作为ATM的代表,很感谢您接纳了我们作为盟友,为菲律宾人民、我们的孩子及其后代美好的未来而共同进退。

Ako po ay tunay na nagalak noong 18th Anniversary celebration ng Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC) sa Malacañang noong Augosto 29, 2016, kung kailan ang inyong abang lingkod ay tinawag ninyo na “ang Mayor ko sa Quezon City.” Totoong tumaba ang aking puso sa inyong pagkilala at pagpaparangal at pati na rin sa inyong paglagak sa akin ng tiwala bilang inyong kakampi at kandidato sa Quezon City noong Mayo 2016. Hinding hindi ko po makakalimutan ang inyong likas na kabutihan.
我真的为 在二〇一六年八月二十九日于马拉坎南宫志愿者打击犯罪和腐败(VACC)18周年庆祝活动时您称呼我为“我在在奎松市的市长”非常的高兴。我真的对于您的认可和高举感到很窝心,以及您五月二〇一六年在奎松市对我投注的信任让我作为你的盟友和候选人。我不会忘记您固有的善良。

Ngayon, kami po ay dumudulog sa inyo upang ilagak ang aming pagkabalisa ukol sa programa ng Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corporation (PAGCOR) na Philippine Offshore Gaming Operators (POGO) na pawang illegal at sa ngayon ay nagdudulot na ng malubhang gulo at pinsala sa industriya ng online gaming sa ating bansa.
如今,我们向您诉诸我们对于菲律宾政府菠菜委员会(PAGCOR)方案的焦虑,因菲律宾离岸菠菜运营商(POGO)已变违法,现在导致在我国网络游戏产业严重的干扰和损害。

This is truly disturbing, Mr. President, because such is the havoc and unrest POGO is causing, that the local online gaming industry may soon collapse from the portending exodus to other countries of our foreign online gaming investors. In the few weeks of its implementation, POGO may have done irreparable damage to the online gaming industry, which was painstakingly built and nurtured from nothing over the past 15 years.
总统先生,因POGO所造成的破坏和不安,本地网络游戏行业可能很快因我们的外国网络游戏的投资者转移到其他国家而面临倒闭,这事确实是令人担忧。POGO经过几个星期的实施以来,可能已对网络游戏行业在过去15年来从一无所有到现有成就的苦心经营造成不可挽回的损害。

This would be tragic since the recently booming online gaming industry together with its ancillary services now employs tens of thousands of workers. It was even hailed in a few months ago as one of the promising sectors of the Philippines’ BPO industry.
这将会成悲剧,因最近蓬勃发展的网络游戏产业及其辅助服务现在雇佣了成千上万的员工。它甚至在几个月前被誉为菲律宾的BPO产业的有前途的行业之一。

This expected exodus of major industry players and the industry’s eventual collapse would prevent the Philippines from benefitting from the current global boom in online gaming/e-gambling, which is reportedly poised to generate over a hundred billion dollars in annual revenues in the next few years to several hundred billion dollars in the next decade.
这所预期的主要行业参与者出走和行业的最终倒闭将阻碍菲律宾从当前全球网络游戏/赌博的繁荣中受益,据报道,这将在未来几年内产生超过一千亿美元甚至在未来十年的几千亿美元。

We have been informed by reliable industry sources that aside from the required POGO fee of US$500,000.00 that PAGCOR is obligating from industry players, there are designated “agents” who are going around and trying to squeeze out another US$500,000.00 from each registering company as part of the arrangement.
我们已经通过可靠的业内人士处获悉除了所需的500,000.00美元POGO费用PAGCOR要业内人士承付,另还有指定的“代理人” 到处走访并试图从每间注册公司作为协议的一部分挤出另外500,000.00美元。

These same sources have told us that while online gaming companies are grudgingly complying with the imposed new arrangements and financial exactions, most are only actually buying time in order to stave of further harassment and ease the undue pressure on their operations even as they are preparing to transfer to other hospitable ASEAN countries, in particular Cambodia and Vietnam, which are far more welcoming to online gaming companies.
这些相同的人士告诉我们,虽然网络游戏公司勉强遵守强加的新安排和财务活动,大多数实际上只是利用时间为了延缓进一步的骚扰, 并减轻对其运营的不当压力即使他们正准备转移到其他好客的东盟国家,尤其是柬埔寨和越南,均远更欢迎网络游戏公司。

This may be the unintended consequence of the POGO program, but what PAGCOR is now doing to the online gaming industry is virtually tantamount to economic sabotage.
这可能是POGO方案所意想不到的后果,但是PAGCOR现在对网络游戏行业所做的事情实际上相当于经济破坏。

We therefore earnestly appeal to you, Mr. President, to immediately rein in PAGCOR, investigate its questionable activities in its POGO program and conduct an exhaustive legal study on the legitimacy of the current authorities regulating and licensing online gaming and eventually make a firm pronouncement of legal, transparent and responsive national online gaming policy. As with any industry in our economy, online gaming companies require security, certainly and predictability in order to have the “peace of mind” to operate and flourish.
因此,总统先生,我们诚恳地呼吁您,立即管理PAGCOR,在其POGO方案中调查其可疑活动,并进行详尽的法律研究关于当前当局规范和许可网络游戏的合法性,并最终作出依法、透明、响应国家网络游戏政策坚定的声明。正如我们的经济任何行业,网络游戏公司需要安全、肯定和可预测性,以拥有“安心”操作和蓬勃发展。

Recent events where a raid was conducted on Fontana, and the next day, as if on cue, Secretary Aguirre was openly telling online gaming companies to secure licenses from PAGCOR, gives the impression all too plainly that there will be more shakedowns.
最近的是在丰塔纳(Fontana)进行突袭的事件,就在隔天,仿佛是一种启示,司法部長Aguirre公开告诉网络游戏公司都要取得PAGCOR的许可证,给人的印象太清楚了,将会有更多的动荡。

With regard to PAGCOR’s wielding of its assumed ‘authority,’ we wish to point out the very serious legal implications which must be carefully considered before allowing this agency to perpetrate its error.
关于PAGCOR坚持其假定的‘权威’,我们希望指出在允许这个机构犯下错误之前,一定要慎重考虑非常严重的法律影响。

To begin with, PAGCOR has never been vested by law with the authority to regulate and license online/internet gaming. A simple reading of PAGCOR’s charter, even through its amendments, clearly reveals this. But this fact has never prevented PAGCOR in the past from arrogating unto itself the power of oversight and regulation over this gaming mode, which has been revolutionized over the years by the rapidly evolving cyber-technology.
首先,PAGCOR从未被法律赋予权力以规范和授权网络/互联网游戏。简单阅读PAGCOR的章程、甚至通过其修正案,清楚地表明了这一点。但这个事实从未在过去阻止过PAGCOR冒用给予自身对这种游戏模式的监督和监管的力量,这些年来由于迅速变化的网络技术已经革新。

Not even with its resounding defeat in the Supreme Court in 2004 in the landmark case Jaworski vs. PAGCOR and Sports and Games Entertainment Corporation (G.R. No. 144463) has PAGCOR been stymied in its overweening obsession to control online or cyber-gambling.
PAGCOR甚至没有在2004年在最高法院的惨败在标志性的情况下贾沃斯基(Jaworski)对PAGCOR和体育和游戏娱乐公司(G.R. No. 144463)在其以自我为中心的痴迷被阻挠以控制在线或网络赌博。

In that historic case, the SC decision is plainly instructive:
在这个历史性案件中,SC决定显然是有指导意义的:
X X X
“Petitioner, in his capacity as member of the Senate and Chairman of the Senate Committee on Games, Amusement and Sports, files the instant petition, praying that the grant of authority by PAGCOR in favor of SAGE be nullified. He maintains that PAGCOR committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it authorized SAGE to operate gambling on the internet. He contends that PAGCOR is not authorized under its legislative franchise, P.D. 1869, to operate gambling on the internet for the simple reason that the said decree could not have possibly contemplated internet gambling since at the time of its enactment on July 11, 1983 the internet was yet inexistent and gambling activities were confined exclusively to real-space. Further, he argues that the internet, being an international network of computers, necessarily transcends the territorial jurisdiction of the Philippines, and the grant to SAGE of authority to operate internet gambling contravenes the limitation in PAGCOR’s franchise, under Section 14 of P.D. No. 1869 which provides:
“请愿者,以他的身份作为参议院议员,以及游戏、娱乐和体育参议院委员会主席,提交即时请愿书,恳切希望PAGCOR对SAGE的授权被取消。他认为当PAGCOR授权SAGE在互联网上经营赌博,严重滥用自由裁量权相当于管辖权缺乏或过剩。他争辩说,PAGCOR根据总统令1869号其立法专营权未被授权在互联网上经营赌博,原因很简单,因为上述法令在1983年7月11日颁布的时候,互联网仍尚未存在,不可能考虑到互联网赌博,和赌博活动只限于现实空间。此外,他认为互联网,作为计算机的国际网络,必然超越菲律宾的领土管辖权,授予SAGE运营互联网赌博的权力违反限制在PAGCOR的专营权,根据总统令1869号总统令第14条规定:

“Place. - The Corporation [i.e., PAGCOR] shall conduct gambling activities or games of chance on land or water within the territorial jurisdiction of the Republic of the Philippines. x x x
“地点。- 公司【即PAGCOR】在菲律宾共和国领土管辖范围内的土地或水上,应进行赌博活动或机会游戏。x x x
“Moreover, according to petitioner, internet gambling does not fall under any of the categories of the authorized gambling activities enumerated under Section 10 of P.D. No. 1869 which grants PAGCOR the “right, privilege and authority to operate and maintain gambling casinos, clubs, and other recreation or amusement places, sports gaming pools, within the territorial jurisdiction of the Republic of the Philippines.”[1] He contends that internet gambling could not have been included within the commonly accepted definition of “gambling casinos”, “clubs” or “other recreation or amusement places” as these terms refer to a physical structure in real-space where people who intend to bet or gamble go and play games of chance authorized by law.
“此外,根据请愿人,互联网赌博不属于根据第1869号总统令第10条列在任何授权的赌博活动的类别,授予PAGCOR“在菲律宾共和国领土管辖范围内经营和维持赌场、俱乐部和其他娱乐或娱乐场所、体育菠菜池的权利、特权和权力。” [1] 他争辩说,互联网赌博不能被包括在公认的定义中,如:“赌场”、“俱乐部”或“其他娱乐或娱乐场所” 因为这些术语是指打算赌注或赌博的人在实际空间中的物理结构那里去玩法律授权的机会游戏。

X X X
“A legislative franchise is a special privilege granted by the state to corporations. It is a privilege of public concern which cannot be exercised at will and pleasure, but should be reserved for public control and administration, either by the government directly, or by public agents, under such conditions and regulations as the government may impose on them in the interest of the public. It is Congress that prescribes the conditions on which the grant of the franchise may be made. Thus the manner of granting the franchise, to whom it may be granted, the mode of conducting the business, the charter and the quality of the service to be rendered and the duty of the grantee to the public in exercising the franchise are almost always defined in clear and unequivocal language.
“一项立法专营权是国家给予公司的特殊特权。这是公众关注的特权,不能随意行使,但应该保留用于公共控制和管理,通过直接的政府、或者通过公共代理,在这种条件和规定下,因为政府可能为了公众的利益而强加给他们。国会规定哪些可以作出专营权批予的条件。因此授予专营权的方式,对于可能被授予的人,在进行业务的模式,章程和要呈现的服务的质量、以及专营公司在行使专营权方面的责任,几乎总是用清楚和明确的语言来定义。

“After a circumspect consideration of the foregoing discussion and the contending positions of the parties, we hold that PAGCOR has acted beyond the limits of its authority when it passed on or shared its franchise to SAGE.
“经过仔细考虑上述讨论和各方的争执立场,我们认为PAGCOR当它传递或分享其专营权给SAGE时,已采取超出其权限范围的行动。

X X X
“In the case at bar, PAGCOR executed an agreement with SAGE whereby the former grants the latter the authority to operate and maintain sports betting stations and Internet gaming operations. In essence, the grant of authority gives SAGE the privilege to actively participate, partake and share PAGCOR’s franchise to operate a gambling activity. The grant of franchise is a special privilege that constitutes a right and a duty to be performed by the grantee. The grantee must not perform its activities arbitrarily and whimsically but must abide by the limits set by its franchise and strictly adhere to its terms and conditionalities. A corporation as a creature of the State is presumed to exist for the common good. Hence, the special privileges and franchises it receives are subject to the laws of the State and the limitations of its charter. There is therefore a reserved right of the State to inquire how these privileges had been employed, and whether they have been abused.
“当这官司在法庭时,PAGCOR与SAGE签订了协议,其中前者授予后者权力以操作和维持体育投注站和互联网游戏运营。从本质上说,授予权限赋予SAGE特权积极参与、参加并分享PAGCOR的专营权以经营赌博活动。授予专营权是一项特别优惠,这构成一项权利和义务由承授人执行。受让人不得任意和异想天开执行其活动,但必须遵守其专营权规定的限制、并严格遵守其条款和条件。一个公司作为国家的一份子,推定为共同利益而存在。因此,它收到的特权和特许经营权,受国家法律约束、及其章程的限制。因此,国家有保留的权利询问这些特权是如何使用的,以及他们是否被滥用。

“While PAGCOR is allowed under its charter to enter into operator’s and/or management contracts, it is not allowed under the same charter to relinquish or share its franchise, much less grant a veritable franchise to another entity such as SAGE. PAGCOR cannot delegate its power in view of the legal principle of delegata potestas delegare non potest, inasmuch as there is nothing in the charter to show that it has been expressly authorized to do so. In Lim v. Pacquing,[10] the Court clarified that “since ADC has no franchise from Congress to operate the jai-alai, it may not so operate even if it has a license or permit from the City Mayor to operate the jai-alai in the City of Manila.” By the same token, SAGE has to obtain a separate legislative franchise and not “ride on” PAGCOR’s franchise if it were to legally operate online Internet gambling.
虽然PAGCOR根据其章程被允许签订运营商和/或管理合同,根据同一章程不允许放弃或分享其专营权,更不用说给予另一个实体如SAGE一个真正的特许经营权。PAGCOR鉴于法律授权力不能被委派原则,不能授权其权力,因为章程中没有任何规定表明它已明确授权这样做。在Lim v. Pacquing,[10] 法院澄清了“因为ADC没有国会特许经营jai-alai,即使它有市长的牌照或许可证,它可能不会这样操作在马尼拉市经营jai-alai。” 出于同样的原因,SAGE必须获得单独的立法专利权,而不是“骑”PAGCOR的特许经营,如果要合法经营在线网络赌博。

In fact, it is instructive that when the Philippine Congress amended PAGCOR’s charter on June 20, 2007 with the passage of Republic Act No. 9487, our lawmakers never included online and internet gaming/gambling within the ambit of its regulatory jurisdiction. And this is even when our lawmakers were well aware of the legal clarifications in the landmark SC decision in Jaworski vs PAGCOR & SAGE. We can perhaps surmise that Congress simply recognized the futility of giving this regulatory authority to PAGCOR, especially in its present corrupt state.
事实上,当菲律宾议会于2007年6月20日修改了PAGCOR的宪章是有启发性的,随着第9487号共和国法案的通过,我们的立法者在其监管管辖范围内从来没有包括在线和互联网游戏/赌博。这甚至当我们的立法者在Jaworski vs PAGCOR & SAGE具有里程碑意义的最高法院判决清楚地知道法律澄清。我们也许可以推测国会只是认识到给这个监管当局PAGCOR是徒劳的,特别是在目前的腐败状态。

It must also be underscored that the absence of any reference to online gaming and its unique features and the necessary corresponding guidelines, rules and regulations to govern these in PAGCOR’s charter, even up to its latest amendment in 2007, clearly shows that online gaming is excluded from the franchise bestowed upon it by Congress.
还必须强调在没有任何参考于网络游戏及其独特的功能,和必要的相应指导方针、规则和条例,以管理这些在PAGCOR的章程,甚至到2007年的最新修订,清楚地表明网络游戏被排除在国会授予的特许经营权之外。

We must be guided by the Supreme Court in understanding PAGCOR’s present gambling franchise. And Del Mar vs. PAGCOR (G.R. No. 138298 November 29, 2000) sheds clarifying light on the matter of gambling franchises, to wit:
我们必须得到最高法院的指导了解PAGCOR目前的赌博特许经营权。对于Del Mar vs. PAGCOR(G.R. No. 138298二○○○年十一月二十九日)阐明了赌博专营权的问题:

X X X
“A franchise is a special privilege conferred upon a corporation or individual by a government duly empowered legally to grant it. It is a privilege of public concern which cannot be exercised at will and pleasure, but should be reserved for public control and administration, either by the government directly, or by public agents, under such conditions and regulations as the government may impose on them in the interest of the public. A franchise thus emanates from a sovereign power and the grant is inherently a legislative power. It may, however, be derived indirectly from the state through an agency to which the power has been clearly and validly delegated. In such cases, Congress prescribes the conditions on which the grant of a franchise may be made. Thus, the manner of granting the franchise, to whom it may be granted, the mode of conducting the business, the character and quality of the service to be rendered and the duty of the grantee to the public in exercising the franchise are almost always defined in clear and unequivocal language. In the absence of these defining terms, any claim to a legislative franchise to operate a game played for bets and denounced as a menace to morality ought to be rejected.”
“专营权是赋予公司或个人的特权由合法授权的政府授予。这是公众关注的特权不能以意志和快乐行使,但应该保留用于公共控制和管理,无论是政府直接,或由公共代理人,在这种条件和规定下因为政府可能为了公众的利益而强加给他们。因此,专营权来自主权权力,而补助金本质上是一种立法权力。然而,它可以从国家通过一个机构该权力已得到明确有效的授权间接得出。在这种情况下,国会规定条件其中可授予专营权。因此,授予专营权的方式,它可能被授予,在进行业务的模式,要呈现的服务的特性和质量,而专营公司在行使专营权方面的责任,几乎总是以明确无误的语言界定。在没有这些定义术语的情况下,任何对立法专营权的申索操作为下注玩的游戏,并谴责为对道德的威胁应该被拒绝。”

Notwithstanding this clear rebuff at the Supreme Court, PAGCOR has persisted in its arrogant presumption. Until recently stopped in its erstwhile sweetheart deal with PhilWeb, it continued to grant online/internet gambling licenses left and right until cyber-gaming parlors virtually mushroomed all over the urban centers of our country. From Northern Luzon to Mindanao, business and commercial centers and even economic zones began to have internet/online gaming shops featuring casino-type online gambling which were very open to the general public.
尽管最高法院有这种明显的明确回绝,PAGCOR坚持其傲慢的推定。直到最近停止与PhilWeb在其昔日特别交易,它继续授予在线/互联网赌博许可证,直到网络游戏厅几乎雨后春笋般出现了我国的城市中心。从北吕宋到棉兰老,商业和商业中心甚至经济区开始有互联网/在线游戏商店其中包括对公众开放的赌场型在线赌博。

With its haphazard way of dispensing its presumed authority, PAGCOR even actually violating its clear mandate by approving gaming licenses for online and internet gambling operations in virtually any location, contrary to the explicit stipulation of R.A. 9487, to wit, “… shall not be allowed in establishments open or accessible to the general public …”.
以其随意的方式分配其推定的权威,PAGCOR甚至实际上违反了其明确的任务,通过在几乎任何地点的在线和互联网赌博操作批准菠菜牌照,违反了共和国法案第9487号的明确规定 “。。。不得在公众开放或无障碍的场所中使用。。。”。

As such, PAGCOR has already demonstrated gross irresponsibility and incompetence in dispensing of an imagined, although invalid, authority by violating its clear mandate. For this, PAGCOR must be severely censured, and its abuse of authority curtailed.
因此,PAGCOR已经表明严重不负责任和无能通过违反其明确的任务授予一个想象的、虽然无效的权威。为此,PAGCOR必须严格被谴责,其滥用职权被削减。

Moreover, PAGCOR as an organization has been found to be wallowing in corruption. As you, Sir, underscored during the election campaign, and it is a widely known fact that PAGCOR is one of government’s most corrupt agencies, regularly figuring in corruption news through the years. As such, giving it this kind of authority, where the temptation for bribery and corruption is so high, is virtually throwing it to the dogs.
此外,PAGCOR作为一个组织已被发现在腐败中打滚。正如你,先生,强调在竞选活动期间,和这是一个广为人知的事实PAGCOR是政府最腐败的机构之一,多年来经常在腐败新闻中打滚。因此,赋予它这种权限,其中贿赂和腐败的诱惑是如此之高,实际上是把它扔向狗。

Equally important, Mr. President, we wish to underscore the need for consistency in national policy. Together with the war on drugs and criminality, we need to pursue an aggressive second front against corruption as these two other ruinous problems are the bane of the Filipino society, which are really eroding the moral fiber of our families.
同样重要的,总统先生,我们希望强调国家政策的一致性的必要性。加上关于毒品和犯罪的战争,我们需要采取侵略性的第二战场反对腐败因为这两个其他毁灭性的问题是菲律宾社会的祸根,这是真的削弱我们的家庭的道德品质。

We truly hope, Mr. President, that you will not allow your administration to be duped into hastily deciding on this vital issue. We urge you to order, instead, a thorough and exhaustive study of the matter of online/internet gaming and the present situation of PAGCOR, and to resolve all the issues and concerns in a manner reflective of the best interests of the Filipino family.
我们真的希望,总统先生,您不会允许您的行政被哄骗匆忙地决定这个重要的问题。我们敦促您命令,相反的,对网络/互联网游戏事件和PAGCOR目前情况的彻底和详尽的研究,并以反映菲律宾家庭最大利益的方式解决所有问题和关切。

Mahal na Pangulo, marahil ay hindi naman kalabisang sabihin na kami ay kasama sa mga nangunguna sa mahigit 91% na lubos na nagtitiwala sa inyo at sa inyong dakilang programa para sa ating giliw na bansa. Batid po namin ang malalim na bukal ng pag-ibig sa inyong puso para sa ating mga kababayan.
尊敬的总统,如果我们说我们是属于那超过91%信任您的人以及对于您为我们亲爱的祖国伟大的计划并不是夸张的。我们深知您为我们的人民爱是存在于您心深处。

Dahil dito, kami po ay taimtim na umaasa na hindi ninyo papayagan ang maling patakaran na mamayani sa inyong pamahalaan. Sana po ay bigyan pa natin ng masusi at malawakang ang bagay na ito upang maiwasan natin ang pagkakamali ng nakaraan.
因此,我们真诚地希望你不容许错误的政策在政府占上风。为这件事情,我们希望您将给予更彻底和全面的关注以避免过去的错误。

Umaasa po kami sa inyong mapagbigay-loob at butihing pagunawa sa aming mga hinaing at alalahanin.
我们期待着您对我们冤屈和担忧给予确切和良好的理解。

Daghang salamat po.
非常感谢。

Lubos na gumagalang,,
敬上,

KA LEON ESTRELLA PERALTA
菲律宾华人电报群
回复

使用道具 举报

136

主题

190

帖子

376

菲华币

菲华特使

Rank: 3Rank: 3

积分
329
发表于 2017-1-10 22:53:00 | 显示全部楼层
其实她质疑的并不是PAGCOR作为一家国营公司的合法性,而是质疑PAGCOR无权过问线上赌博活动,因为PAGCOR成立于1983年时,还没有互联网。其实赌博行业见仁见智。很多外国菠菜公司到菲律宾营业,没有取得政府合法牌照,也不正常缴税,所雇用的人员也都是外国来的,特别是中国,他们同样没有缴纳所得税,这就是弊端。就等于菲律宾成为线上菠菜的一个平台,但政府实际上所得到的利益并不多。相信如果所有菠菜公司跟员工跟一般民众一样依法纳税,就不会出现那么多问题。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

2

主题

89

帖子

0

菲华币

菲华卫士

Rank: 2

积分
119
发表于 2017-1-11 10:34:00 | 显示全部楼层
重点就是,要嚼碎!
Q:763637617
1.专注于BC菠菜行业支付
2.支持PC端手机端
3.实力保障资金安全
4.现号,最快当天开接口
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

本版积分规则

快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表