If you’ve been following the storm around the Central Gaming Bill, you already know the gist: while the Supreme Court has finally clarified that gaming is a state matter, Abuja appears determined to slide back through the window after being kicked out the front door. And the tool of that attempted return?
A federal gaming law wrapped in national-importance vocabulary but smelling suspiciously like the old NLRC wearing fresh perfume.
But this new era calls for something more honest, more modern, and frankly, more useful to Nigerians than another round of federal–state tug-of-war. Because the truth is simple: the real gap in our regulatory ecosystem is not taxation. It is technology.
And if the federal government must legislate anything at all, it should be the one thing that MUST be centralized for the sake of national safety, the security and integrity of gaming technology itself.
This is where the telecom industry gives us a sharp lesson. Before any device connects to a Nigerian network, the NCC doesn’t ask states for permission. It doesn’t fight over revenue targets.
It simply enforces one smart idea: No technology touches Nigerians until the technology has been tested, approved, certified, and confirmed safe. That is Type Approval.
It protects consumers. It enforces standards. And most importantly, it keeps everyone, both operators and the nation, honest.
Imagine applying that same clarity to the gaming sector.
Imagine a Nigeria where no platform, local, foreign, online, virtual, land-based, aggregator, white-label or sportsbook, can process a single Nigerian bet unless the underlying technology has passed a federal technical compliance test.
Not a taxation test.
Not a licensing test.
Not a federal–state handshake test.
A Technical Test.
Does the RNG meet global standards? Is the payout logic verifiable? Are KYC systems manipulative? Does the backend leak player data? Is the platform remotely configured in a way that could exploit Nigerians? Can the company’s offshore server vanish with all winnings in one midnight update?
This is what a federal law should be doing, protecting Nigerians from unsafe, untested, unregulated technology, not muscling states for revenue the constitution clearly gives them.
In this new arc of Gaming Grid, this is our focus: designing the kind of federal regulation that is constitutionally sound, technologically relevant, investor-friendly, pro-innovation and, most importantly, player-protective.
A framework that does not undermine state authority but instead ‘supports it’, the same way NCC supports states without dictating telecom taxation.
Because whether we agree or not, Nigeria has become one giant gaming market. If you have a phone, you’re a potential player. And if every phone is a potential gateway, then every untested gaming platform is a potential national threat.
It’s time we stopped pretending that taxation is the problem worth fighting for. It’s not. The real danger is unregulated technology, particularly offshore platforms with no oversight, no accountability and no consequences.
So yes, the Central Gaming Bill can exist. But it must change its ambition. The federal government’s role should be technical, a national firewall against predatory gaming systems, not another revenue collector in disguise.
Next week, we’ll push this conversation deeper as we explore something even more delicate: “How a Centralized Responsible Gaming Framework Should Be Designed in Nigeria – Without Violating State Autonomy.”
*‘Gaming Grid’ is your weekly pulse on Nigeria’s gaming industry, its trends, and its trailblazers. Stay plugged in on Techeconomy as we unpack the opportunities beyond the odds.
