Nigeria’s Central Gaming Bill ignites constitutional firestorm

Nigeria’s gambling sector has exploded in growth—but now it’s caught in a high-stakes legislative dispute.

The Central Gaming Bill 2025, pushed in Abuja, seeks to centralise gaming regulation in Nigeria. Critics call it a direct challenge to a 2024 Supreme Court of Nigeria ruling and the federal constitution.

As a gambling regulation expert, I believe this dispute is about more than licenses—it tests the rule of law and federal‐state balance in Nigeria.

Read on. I’ll analyse the bill’s provisions, the legal objections and what operators should watch.

Key Points

• The Central Gaming Bill aims to repeal the nullified National Lottery Act 2005 and establish a central regulator.
• The bill is opposed by the Federation of State Gaming Regulators of Nigeria (FSGRN), which warns of federal overreach.
• A Supreme Court decision in November 2024 ruled that lotteries and games of chance are under state legislative competence, not federal.
• Legal experts describe the bill as “unfounded” and “unconstitutional” for ignoring the Court’s ruling.
• The public interest group Coalition of Good Governance (CCG) slams the National Assembly’s move as “legislative rascality.”

Nigeria’s Central Gaming Bill Sparks Constitutional Clash: States vs Abuja in Gambling Regulation Battle

Nigeria’s gaming industry is booming with mobile penetration, fintech and youth engagement. Yet regulatory clarity remains elusive. Into this dynamic comes the Central Gaming Bill 2025, which attempts to centralise regulation under a federal commission. Operators, investors and states are watching closely.

What the Bill Seeks to Do

According to legal commentary, the bill proposes a federal regulator to license, supervise and collect revenues from all forms of gaming—including online/remote—nationwide. Afriwise It would repeal the old National Lottery Act and extend federal control beyond the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

Proponents argue the old framework lacked clarity on online gaming and cross-state operations. They claim the central regulator will streamline licensing and combat illicit betting.

Why the States and Experts Push Back

However, states and legal experts are unanimous: this bill rewrites what the Supreme Court has already decided. In November 2024 the Supreme Court, in Attorney General of Lagos State & Ors v. Attorney General of the Federation & Ors, ruled that gaming and lotteries fall under the residual legislative powers of states—not the National Assembly.

The FSGRN, representing regulators from over 20 states, warns that the bill threatens fiscal federalism and constitutional order. Moreover, legal advisors say the attempt is “unfounded” because the old act already covered online and remote gaming under lottery definitions.

Impact for Operators

For gaming operators, this standoff creates uncertainty. If states retain authority, licences will remain fragmented. If the federal bill passes and is later struck down, it may cause licence chaos and revenue disruption.

From my analyst vantage: firms must assess both state-compliance frameworks (e.g., Lagos, Rivers) and federal ambitions. Regional legal clarity could provide first-mover advantage—but change is still in motion.

What Could Happen Next

Several scenarios emerge:

• The National Assembly proceeds; the bill becomes law and states litigate its validity—risking extended legal delays.
• A constitutional amendment to place gaming on the Exclusive Legislative List is pursued—lengthy and uncertain.
• A negotiated federal-state formula emerges, granting states autonomy but coordinating oversight for tech and payments.

From my professional judgment, the path of least friction is collaborative reform. Operators may prefer regulatory certainty over sudden federal shifts.

My Analytical Take

In my opinion, Nigeria’s gaming regulation is at a crossroads. The Central Gaming Bill may appear well-intentioned, but it disregards constitutional precedent and state autonomy. Unless framed carefully, it risks being a wasted political effort with legal nullity. For the industry, the lesson is clear: regulatory environments depend on constitutional foundations as much as licensing regimes.

The rising conflict over Nigeria’s Central Gaming Bill reveals deeper tensions than industry regulation—it tests Nigeria’s constitutional architecture and rule of law. As a gambling professional, I view this moment as a signal: regulatory clarity, constitutional alignment and stakeholder consensus matter more than legislation passed in haste. For operators and regulators alike, the advice is to stay agile, monitor developments and prioritise frameworks built on legitimacy—not just ambition.

Tags: NigeriaGamingLaw, CentralGamingBill2025, FSGRN, LegalComplianceNigeria, GamingRegulationAfrica