The Federation of State Gaming Regulators of Nigeria (FSGRN) is raising the alarm over a new bill that could significantly change the gaming landscape in Nigeria. Senate President, Godswill Akpabio have been urged to prevent the Central Gaming Bill (HB.2062) from becoming law, citing constitutional issues and potential financial repercussions for the states.
The FSGRN argues that the bill is unconstitutional and could strip states of a vital source of income. “This is not just about legality. It’s about fairness and financial survival for the states,” said Olajide Boladuro, Vice Chairman of the FSGRN.
According to the FSGRN, the Nigerian Constitution clearly designates lotteries, betting, and gaming as residual matters, meaning only state governments have the authority to legislate on these issues, not the federal government.
They reference a 2024 Supreme Court ruling in the case of Attorney General of Lagos State & Ors v. Attorney General of the Federation, which determined that the National Assembly can only regulate gaming activities within the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), not across all 36 states.
Supporters of the bill argue that many gaming platforms operate online, classifying them as interstate commerce under federal jurisdiction. However, the Supreme Court ruling clarified that the online nature of gaming does not change its classification as a state matter.
Beyond the legal ramifications, states are also concerned about potential revenue loss. Currently, state governments license gaming operators, regulate them, and collect taxes, generating significant internally generated revenue (IGR) that funds state projects and services.
If the Central Gaming Bill is enacted, the federal government would assume these roles and the accompanying revenue, which the FSGRN argues would undermine state finances and the principle of fiscal federalism. This principle holds that each level of government should manage its own financial resources. In simple terms, states are demanding: “Hands off our income.”
Proponents of the bill claim it will standardize gaming laws, simplify regulation, and boost national revenue. However, the FSGRN views it as a power grab that would diminish state control, reduce transparency, and centralize authority in Abuja. “Gaming is one of the fastest-growing sectors in Nigeria,” Boladuro noted. “If the federal government takes control, what comes next? States must be allowed to manage industries that support their economies.”
The Senate now faces a critical decision: Will they adhere to the Supreme Court ruling and to enable states retain control over gaming, or proceed with a bill that could escalate tensions between federal and state governments? Ultimately, this issue extends beyond gaming; it reflects larger questions about power-sharing and fairness in Nigeria’s modern, digital economy.
