President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has made it clear he will not sign the Central Gaming Bill into law, citing constitutional limits on federal authority and reinforcing the place of states in regulating Nigeria’s gaming and lottery industry. His position has reignited national debate around federalism, constitutional supremacy and the future regulation of a rapidly expanding digital gaming sector.
The Central Gaming Bill was introduced to overhaul Nigeria’s gaming and lottery framework in response to the surge in online betting, digital lotteries, and remote gaming platforms. Proponents argued that existing laws are outdated and fragmented, creating regulatory uncertainty for both operators and authorities as the industry becomes increasingly digital and cross-border in nature.
At the heart of the proposed legislation was the repeal of the National Lottery Act and the creation of a centralised federal regulator. The bill sought to establish a national gaming authority empowered to license, regulate and oversee gaming activities across Nigeria, particularly those conducted online or spanning multiple states. Supporters said the aim was to harmonise licensing standards, compliance rules, consumer protection, and revenue collection in an industry no longer confined by physical boundaries.
The bill progressed through the legislative process, passing both chambers of the National Assembly and securing Senate approval after its third reading. Under normal circumstances, it would have proceeded to the President for assent. That final step, however, is where the process has stalled.
President Tinubu’s refusal to sign the bill is not based on opposition to regulation, but on constitutional principle. His position is that lottery and gaming fall under the legislative competence of state governments rather than the federal government. Under Nigeria’s Constitution, powers not expressly granted to the centre are treated as residual matters reserved for the states.
This stance mirrors a landmark Supreme Court judgment delivered in 2024, which held that the National Assembly lacks authority to legislate on lottery and gaming across the federation, except within the Federal Capital Territory. The ruling effectively stripped federal reach from the National Lottery Act as it applied to the states, firmly establishing gaming regulation as a state matter.
From the President’s perspective, assenting to the Central Gaming Bill in its current form would mean endorsing legislation that conflicts with both the Constitution and a binding decision of the Supreme Court. He has reportedly described himself as a constitutional democrat and has urged lawmakers to respect judicial authority rather than attempt to reassert federal control over gaming through fresh legislation.
Several state governments and gaming regulators have welcomed the President’s position, notably Lagos State, which has led legal challenges against federal involvement in lottery regulation. These stakeholders argue that the Central Gaming Bill is effectively a rebranded version of the same federal approach already rejected by the courts.
For Nigeria’s gaming industry, the decision offers clarity while also creating uncertainty. It confirms that regulation remains, for now, primarily a state responsibility. At the same time, it leaves unresolved how online and cross-border gaming activities should be managed in a digital economy where transactions cut across state lines with ease.
Possible next steps include a redrafted bill limiting federal oversight strictly to the Federal Capital Territory, a constitutional amendment explicitly granting federal powers over gaming, or continued reliance on state-based regulation supported by inter-state coordination. Until then, the Central Gaming Bill remains unsigned, and the industry continues to operate within a decentralised regulatory framework.
Beyond gaming, the episode highlights a broader challenge in Nigeria’s governance: balancing central authority with federal principles in regulating fast-moving digital industries. How this tension is resolved could shape policy far beyond the gaming sector.
No comments:
Post a Comment