Nigeria’s Gambling Bill Sparks Constitutional Clash Amid Rapid Market Expansion
Nigeria’s renewed attempt to centralise regulation of its burgeoning gambling industry has triggered a fierce constitutional confrontation, setting up a major legal and political battle at a time when the gaming market is experiencing unprecedented growth.
In recent weeks, the Senate passed the Central Gaming Bill 2025, a legislative proposal seeking to establish a unified national authority to oversee sports betting, lotteries, online gaming and related activities. If eventually endorsed by the House of Representatives and signed into law, the bill would dissolve existing federal lottery regulations and replace the current patchwork of state-level frameworks with a single regulatory body.
Lawmakers behind the bill argue that Nigeria’s fast-expanding gaming economy, fuelled by rising smartphone use, improved broadband access and the popularity of sports betting among young citizens, requires a modernised, centralised system.
According to industry observers, the gambling sector now contributes significantly to employment and digital payments, with revenues rising sharply in major cities and online platforms drawing millions of daily transactions.
Supporters insist that only a unified nationwide structure can establish consistent enforcement, boost investor confidence and plug revenue leakages.
However, the proposal has ignited intense pushback from several state governments, regulatory bodies and constitutional lawyers. They insist that gaming and lotteries fall squarely within state jurisdiction, citing a landmark Supreme Court ruling delivered in 2024 which affirmed that the National Assembly lacked the authority to legislate on matters reserved for subnational governments. Critics argue that the new bill directly contradicts that judgment and undermines Nigeria’s federal system.
Some states, particularly those with well-developed gaming regulations, have threatened fresh legal action and accused the federal legislature of ignoring constitutional boundaries.
Beyond the constitutional questions, concerns also revolve around governance and resource control. State authorities fear that centralisation could strip them of licensing power and significant internally-generated revenue. Civil society groups have also warned that concentrating regulatory control in Abuja may reduce transparency and slow down enforcement responsiveness.
Proponents of the bill counter that internet-based betting operations frequently cross state borders, making decentralised regulation ineffective in curbing financial crimes, illegal operators and underage gambling.
They emphasise that a national framework would standardise consumer protection policies, enhance tax compliance and streamline oversight in a market increasingly dominated by digital platforms.
As the bill moves to the House of Representatives, analysts predict heightened lobbying, public hearings and potential court filings. Should it pass and receive presidential assent, a swift legal showdown appears inevitable, with the Supreme Court expected to once again determine the limits of federal power.
What is unfolding is more than a regulatory debate it is a test of Nigeria’s constitutional structure, the autonomy of states and the future direction of one of the country’s fastest-growing digital industries. Whether Nigeria eventually adopts a centralised model or maintains its current state-driven approach will shape investment decisions, government revenues and consumer protections in the years ahead.
