South Africa’s Gambling Law Reform Stalls as Provinces Push Back on National Overreach

Legislation intended to overhaul and modernise South Africa’s gambling regulatory framework has reached a critical impasse, caught in a web of procedural delays and escalating tensions between national and provincial authorities.

The National Gambling Amendment Bill, first tabled in 2018, has now lapsed on two occasions and is once again facing firm resistance from provinces, which argue that the proposed reforms threaten constitutional powers, undermine provincial revenues, and introduce costly regulatory duplication.

The Bill was conceived as part of a broader effort, dating back to 2015, to harmonise gambling regulation across the country in response to rapid technological change and the explosive growth of online betting. Instead, it has evolved into a prolonged legislative saga, raising fundamental questions about governance, accountability, and the balance of power between spheres of government.

These regulatory disputes are unfolding against the backdrop of a mounting social crisis. Gambling addiction has had a profound impact across South Africa, with the heaviest burden falling on poor and vulnerable communities. As economic pressures intensify, many individuals are drawn toward gambling by the promise of fast financial relief. Estimates suggest that South Africans now gamble more than R1 trillion each year, with sports betting alone accounting for approximately R700 billion of that total.

The financial consequences are particularly severe for low-income households, where gambling losses compound existing hardship. According to Old Mutual’s head of financial education, John Manyike, “36% of gamblers would bet to pay off debts or cover expenses,” a figure that rises to “41% among low-income earners.” These statistics underscore how gambling is increasingly used as a coping mechanism rather than entertainment.

The damage extends well beyond household finances. A University of Cape Town study cited in the discussions found that pathological gamblers were “five to ten times more likely to have a history of suicide attempts than non-gamblers,” highlighting the significant mental health risks associated with problem gambling.

Amid these concerns, provincial authorities have intensified their objections to the Bill’s current form. During a recent briefing to the Western Cape Provincial Parliament’s Standing Committee on Finance, officials outlined serious reservations about the proposed legislation.

The Western Cape Gambling and Racing Board (WCGRB) lodged what it described as “strong objections,” warning that key provisions “encroach on provincial competencies, create duplication, and threaten provincial revenue.”

At the centre of the dispute is the proposed expansion of the National Central Electronic Monitoring System (NCEMS). The Bill seeks to extend the system across all gambling activities nationwide, a move strongly opposed by the WCGRB. The Board’s Legal Manager, Liezel Hartman, argued that applying the NCEMS universally would “usurp the powers of Provincial Licensing Authorities” while imposing unnecessary and significant costs on gambling operators.

The WCGRB has also taken issue with proposals to establish a national inspectorate with expanded enforcement powers, viewing this as a direct intrusion into areas constitutionally reserved for provinces. In addition, the Board disputes a clause that would allocate forfeited illegal gambling proceeds to a national body, maintaining that such funds should remain within the province, as required under existing legislation.

Compounding these substantive disagreements is a series of policy reversals that have marked the Bill’s long and troubled journey. Early drafts proposed replacing the National Gambling Board with a new National Gambling Regulator headed by a chief executive officer. However, the final mediated version of the legislation, known as Version D, abandons this approach and reinstates the Board structure.

This shift has raised significant legal and procedural concerns. Advisors warned that reverting from a regulator model back to a board constitutes a material amendment that could trigger a constitutional obligation for renewed public consultation. Advocate Mpho Khoele, Legal Advisor to the Western Cape Provincial Parliament, cautioned that restoring a Board “fundamentally would alter the governance structure and accountability of the national gambling authority,” making fresh public participation necessary.

Parliament’s Legal Advisor, Advocate Frank Jenkins, confirmed that while public consultation was not required during the mediation phase, provinces retained the discretion to initiate such processes themselves. However, he stressed that the mediated legislation is now fixed, stating clearly: “No further amendments may be introduced at this point.”

This limitation has fuelled frustration among provincial lawmakers. Members of the Standing Committee cited a “lack of a clear deadline” from the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) and unresolved concerns over regulatory duplication and control of provincial revenue. With conflicting legal opinions and unresolved substantive issues, the Committee opted to defer any decision on the Bill.

Instead, it will seek clarity from the NCOP regarding timelines and seriously consider launching its own public participation process, which could begin as early as February 2026.

What started as an initiative to modernise and align gambling regulation nearly a decade ago has become a seven-year legislative odyssey marked by repeated lapses, revivals, and deepening disagreements between national and provincial authorities. The resulting stalemate has left critical questions of regulatory authority, fiscal control, and constitutional competence unresolved.

Meanwhile, in townships and low-income households across the country, gambling continues to entrench cycles of debt, distress, and despair. As lawmakers remain deadlocked, the social costs of inaction continue to mount, intensifying the pressure for a coherent and constitutionally sound approach to national gambling governance.

By fLEXI tEAM