Africa Casino Crash Games East Africa Kenya News Regulations Technology Webinars

Kenya’s New Gambling Law Marks the Biggest Regulatory Shift in Six Decades

Mary Wanja July 23, 2026

8 minutes read

For nearly six decades, Kenya’s gambling industry operated under legislation drafted in an era when betting meant visiting a betting shop, casinos were entirely land-based and the internet was still decades away. By the time smartphones, mobile money, online casinos, crash games and digital advertising transformed the country’s gaming ecosystem, the law had long been overtaken by technology.

That disconnect is what the Gambling Control Act, 2025 seeks to address. Speaking during the recent iGaming AFRIKA webinar, titled “Kenya’s Recent Regulatory Shift: What Does the New Law Say?” legal experts and industry practitioners described the new law as the most significant regulatory reform Kenya’s gaming sector has experienced since the Betting, Lotteries and Gaming Act of 1966. The legislation not only replaces the country’s ageing legal framework but also introduces six new regulations governing licensing, online gambling, gambling operations, advertising, responsible gambling and other key aspects of the industry.

A market that outgrew its laws

According to Job Weku, Business Development Manager at FAZI – Africa, Kenya’s regulatory overhaul was driven by years of rapid market expansion that gradually exposed weaknesses in the previous legal framework. He argued that the market had moved through different stages of regulation, beginning with periods of limited oversight before experiencing explosive growth in online betting. Over time, gaps within the licensing system encouraged the emergence of hundreds of operators, many focusing almost exclusively on crash games instead of traditional sportsbook or casino products.

“Kenya has been partly regulated over the years. At some point, we were barely regulated. I will touch on what has transpired over the last two years, and this was the increase in terms of the number of operators. Understand that over time, crash took over the market, there was a spike in terms of revenue, and sports went down. In Kenya as a country, most revenues were coming in from crash, and we ended up having providers who could purely offer standalone crash games as what they offer now to the customer. So they did away with sports, they did away with online casino, which was actually very acceptable. With this, we had a much rooming of operators. We had a certain number, which I believe rose to, if I’m not mistaken, over 200 licensed operators,” he shared

As competition intensified, so did consumer complaints. Players increasingly questioned the fairness of certain games and regulators struggled to distinguish legitimate suppliers from operators offering uncertified products with questionable payout mechanisms. He said misleading advertising, unclear game origins and uncertainty around game certification created an environment where regulators could no longer effectively determine which products were legitimate and which were simply exploiting regulatory loopholes.

Why the 1966 law could no longer work

Lucy Vivi, an Advocate of the High Court of Kenya and Head of Legal & International Government Relations at SiGMA Africa, traced the origins of the reforms back to the very foundation of Kenya’s gambling legislation. The Betting, Lotteries and Gaming Act, she explained, was enacted in 1966, at a time when gambling in Kenya was almost entirely confined to betting shops, lotteries and land-based casinos. It was legislation drafted for an analogue world long before the internet, smartphones or digital financial services transformed how people placed bets.

In the six decades that followed, Kenya’s gambling landscape underwent a dramatic transformation. The emergence of mobile money revolutionised payments that allowed betting to move from physical outlets to mobile phones. Operators such as SportPesa helped popularise mobile betting on an unprecedented scale, and online casinos, crash games and other digital products rapidly expanded the industry’s reach. At the same time, influencer marketing, social media advertising, cryptocurrency, blockchain-based payment solutions, digital wallets and payment service providers fundamentally altered how gambling businesses acquired customers and processed transactions.

The law’s enforcement mechanisms had also become increasingly detached from commercial reality. Penalties ranging from KES2,000 to KES5,000 may have carried weight when the legislation was first enacted, but they offered little deterrent in a multi-billion-shilling industry that was characterised by high transaction volumes.

Lucy further noted that the rapid growth of mobile betting, changing tax policies, heightened public concern over gambling participation and the suspension of several operators in 2019 all exposed the limitations of the existing legal framework and intensified calls for reform. Recognising that piecemeal amendments would no longer suffice, a comprehensive review was initiated and resulted to the publication of a concept paper in 2021 that laid the groundwork for a new regulatory framework.

That process culminated in the introduction of the Gambling Control Bill in Parliament in 2022. Following several rounds of debate, the legislation was eventually enacted as the Gambling Control Act, with the President subsequently assenting to the law on August 7, 2025.

A regulator with broader powers

While much of the discussion around the new law has focused on licensing fees and compliance costs, Kaan Bulakeri, Founder and Strategy Consultant at WekaMawe Advisory, argued that the Act’s main achievement is bringing Kenya’s previously fragmented gambling rules into a single framework. “The key word to explain this new Act is consolidation,” he said. Bulakeri said many of the regulations governing Kenya’s gaming industry had developed over time through directives, notices and separate regulatory instruments. The Act brings those requirements together under a single legal framework that gives both regulators and operators greater clarity on how the market will be governed.

The Act also introduces several structural changes. The Betting Control and Licensing Board (BCLB) was replaced by the Gaming Regulatory Authority (GRA). Operators will also move from the annual licence renewals to three-year licences. It also formally introduces requirements covering online gambling, responsible gambling and central monitoring. Operators will also be required to maintain at least 30% Kenyan ownership.

He believes those changes will reshape the market. Higher capital thresholds, licensing fees and compliance obligations are likely to favour operators with established compliance structures and access to investment, and push others to consider partnerships, mergers or raise additional capital to meet the new requirements.

The regulations behind the Act

The Gaming Regulatory Act is backed by six regulations that give effect to the new framework:

The Gambling Control (Licensing) Regulations, 2026
The Gambling Control (Conduct of Gambling Operations) Regulations, 2026
The Gambling Control (National Lottery) Regulations, 2026
The Gambling Control (Advertising) Regulations, 2026
The Gambling Control (Gambling Appeals Tribunal) Regulations, 2026
The Gambling Control (Foreign Facing Operators) Regulations, 2026

Lucy described the Gambling Control (Licensing) Regulations, 2026, as the foundation of the new licensing regime. The regulations tighten entry requirements by shifting the focus beyond the applicant company to the people behind it. Directors and shareholders will now be subject to fit-and-proper assessments that will cover matters such as integrity, financial standing and criminal history.

The cost of entering the market has increased substantially. Bookmakers and casino operators must each maintain a minimum paid-up capital of KES100 million, backed by a KES100 million bank guarantee or performance bond. This, she however, noted that regulators are still expected to clarify how those requirements will apply across different licence categories.

The regulations also place anti-money laundering obligations on a statutory footing. Licensed operators will be required to implement AML programmes, carry out customer due diligence, monitor transactions and report suspicious activity.

The Gambling Control (Conduct of Gambling Operations) Regulations, 2026, is set to govern how licensees will be supervised once they are operational. A key feature is the introduction of a central monitoring system that will allow the Authority to receive operational data directly from licensed operators. Companies will also be required to establish internal complaints procedures, with disputes resolved within 30 days before they can be referred to the regulator. Technical compliance has been tightened as well. Gaming equipment must be approved by the Authority before it can be deployed, and software platforms will require certification from accredited testing laboratories.

Among the six regulations, the Gambling Control (Advertising) Regulations, 2026 are likely to have the most immediate impact on operators’ day-to-day activities. Advertising on television and radio will be prohibited between 6am and 10pm, except during live sporting events, and restrictions on celebrity and influencer endorsements introduced through previous directives have been retained. Gambling advertisements will also be barred within 200 metres of schools and hospitals and must display responsible gambling messaging, an 18+ warning and customer support information. Operators will no longer be able to publish campaigns without first obtaining approval from the GRA, with breaches attracting penalties of up to KES20 million, imprisonment of up to 20 years, or both.

Lucy also shared that the Gambling Control (Foreign Facing Operators) Regulations, 2026, establishes a separate licensing framework for businesses offering gambling services outside Kenya from within the country. The regulations set out additional licensing, governance and reporting obligations and ensure foreign-facing operators remain subject to the Authority’s oversight.

Running across the new framework is a stronger emphasis on responsible gambling. The regulations introduce structured self-exclusion, mandatory cooling-off periods and enhanced identity verification through electronic Know Your Customer (KYC) checks linked to the Integrated Population Registration System (IPRS). Players seeking to increase the default KES5,000 daily deposit limit will have to wait 24 hours before higher limits take effect, and operators must issue session reminders and automatically log users out after four hours of continuous play.

Moderating the session was iGaming AFRIKA CEO Jeremiah Maangi, who relayed several clarifications from the DG of the Authority, Mr. Peter Maina Karimi. Among them was confirmation that the licensing fees reflected in the regulations are lower than those initially proposed during stakeholder consultations. He also encouraged operators to study the legislation closely and noted that it introduces new licence categories, including prediction markets, that have received little attention despite their potential significance.

Implementation Challenges Come Into Focus

Lucy argued that implementation will determine whether the new framework achieves its intended objectives. One of his biggest concerns was the practicality of the enhanced Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements. She questioned how identity verification would work for players using basic feature phones commonly known us “mulikamwizis” and noted that smartphone penetration remains uneven across the country despite the popularity of online betting beyond Kenya’s major urban centres.

She also pointed to the institutional demands of the new framework. With the GRA now operating as an independent regulator, Lucy said its success would depend on its ability to recruit specialist personnel, including compliance officers, legal experts and technical staff capable of overseeing a more sophisticated regulatory environment. At the same time, the Authority is expected to roll out a central monitoring system that remains under development. This raises questions about whether the technology and human capacity required to enforce the new regime can be delivered within the transition period.

“When we talk about the GRA technological development, they’ve talked about the central monitoring system, but the central monitoring system is still under procurement, I am assuming, or is still under development. When is the estimated time that this central monitoring system will be complete? The people that will be employed, the technical people that will be employed to monitor this technical system, the central monitoring system, how long will it take?” Lucy shared.