<s>[INST] The next text is a question of a member of the European parliament:"According to available information, the Commission decided not to include the gambling and betting infringement cases on the agenda of the College of Commissioners’ meeting of 12October. This means that the seven gambling- and betting-related cases, already on the Commission's table in July for approval, have been postponed once more although it seems that the existence of severe infringements to Community law is not even being questioned within the Commission.  Such a decision to postpone is unfortunate since it occurs in a context of multiplication of complaints against protectionist national measures and in a context of growing legal uncertainty for Community-based operators. These measures are infringing both the rules of the EU Treaty and the settled case-law of the European Court of Justice applying to gambling and betting, notably the Gambelli ruling (C-243/01 of 6November 2003).  Could the Commission please explain why the cases concerning countries such as Denmark, the Netherlands, and Germany for infringing EU internal market rules on the cross- border provision of gambling services have been postponed once again?"
Analyze carefully the text and assign it to the most relevant policy area among those listed below. Do not explain your answer and return only a number.
Policy area numbers: 1 = Macroeconomics
2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties
3 = Health
4 = Agriculture and Fisheries
5 = Labour, employment and pensions
6 = Education
7 = Environment
8 = Energy
9 = Immigration
10 = Transportation
12 = Law and Crime
13 = Social welfare
14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning
15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues
16 = Defence
17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues
18 = Foreign trade
19 = International affairs and foreign aid
20 = Governance and government
21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues
23 = Culture and media
[/INST]. Answer = [15]. </s>
According to available information, the Commission decided not to include the gambling and betting infringement cases on the agenda of the College of Commissioners’ meeting of 12October. This means that the seven gambling- and betting-related cases, already on the Commission's table in July for approval, have been postponed once more although it seems that the existence of severe infringements to Community law is not even being questioned within the Commission.  Such a decision to postpone is unfortunate since it occurs in a context of multiplication of complaints against protectionist national measures and in a context of growing legal uncertainty for Community-based operators. These measures are infringing both the rules of the EU Treaty and the settled case-law of the European Court of Justice applying to gambling and betting, notably the Gambelli ruling (C-243/01 of 6November 2003).  Could the Commission please explain why the cases concerning countries such as Denmark, the Netherlands, and Germany for infringing EU internal market rules on the cross- border provision of gambling services have been postponed once again?