Enugu State Gaming Commission Backs FSGRN in Rejecting Central Gaming Bill
The Enugu State Gaming Commission (ESGC) has reaffirmed its firm opposition to the proposed Central Gaming Bill (HB.2062), aligning itself with the Federation of State Gaming Regulators of Nigeria (FSGRN) in rejecting what it calls an unconstitutional attempt to centralize gaming regulation in the country.
In a recent statement issued in Enugu by its Public Relations Officer, Nwanneka Udeh, the Commission emphasized that the Bill directly contradicts the 1999 Constitution and the Supreme Court’s November 2024 ruling, which affirmed that lotteries and gaming are residual matters falling under the exclusive jurisdiction of state governments.
According to the Executive Secretary and CEO of ESGC, Prince Arinze Arum, the proposed legislation “is unconstitutional and represents a clear encroachment on state powers. Enugu State has made significant investments in developing a robust and transparent regulatory framework for licensing, taxation, and responsible gaming oversight. Any move to centralize this system would undermine state sovereignty and erode critical revenue streams.”
Read Also: South Africas Gambling Industry Surges to ZAR75 Billion as Lawmakers Sound Alarm Over Black Market
Elaborating on the Commission’s stance, the statement noted that the Supreme Court’s judgment “clearly confirmed that lotteries and gaming fall within the legislative competence of the states, not the National Assembly. Centralising this authority would deprive states of essential internally generated revenue and weaken fiscal federalism.”
“The Bill poses a threat to Nigeria’s federal structure,” the ESGC maintained. “The National Assembly’s legislative powers in gaming matters should extend only to the Federal Capital Territory. Enugu State stands united with other regulators across Nigeria in defending the Constitution and the financial autonomy of the states.”
The Commission concluded by urging the Senate to reject the Central Gaming Bill and respect the Supreme Court’s binding decision. “Upholding the judgment is not only a constitutional obligation,” the statement added, “but also vital to protecting state autonomy and preserving the integrity of Nigeria’s federal system.”
Source: ThisdayLive
