South African Bookmakers Urge Legislative Action Against Illegal Gambling

The gambling landscape in South Africa is currently facing a significant challenge. While licensed operators adhere to strict regulatory standards, the black market is flourishing almost unchecked. Sean Coleman, CEO of the Association of South African Bookmakers (SABA), recently clarified that the industry is still in the advocacy and stakeholder engagement phase. The goal is to spark a national policy discussion regarding the lack of laws that enable effective enforcement against illegal offshore entities. For licensed businesses, the current situation is increasingly difficult as they compete against unregulated platforms that ignore social responsibility and tax obligations.

One primary obstacle is the decentralized nature of South African regulation. Unlike jurisdictions with a single national authority, gambling oversight is split across nine provincial frameworks. This adds layers of complexity when trying to coordinate enforcement against international firms. Coleman emphasizes that the problem is not a lack of prohibitory laws but rather the absence of mechanisms to enforce them. SABA has proposed six legislative interventions, including changes to the National Gambling Act and the Electronic Communications Act, to bridge this gap. Without these reforms, the battle against the black market remains ineffective.

Numbers and facts

The scale of the illegal market is staggering. A Yield Sec report commissioned by SABA estimated that illegal operators account for roughly 62% of all online gambling activity in South Africa. This activity diverts more than 50 billion Rand in gross gambling revenue (GGR) offshore every year. The reach of these platforms is equally concerning, with approximately 16 million South Africans engaging with illegal sites in the past year. These operators are highly sophisticated, using local language support and Rand-denominated betting to appear legitimate to unsuspecting consumers.

"Our objective should therefore not be to identify a single solution but rather to implement a practical sequence of complementary interventions that collectively make South Africa a significantly more difficult market for illegal offshore operators to access." - Sean Coleman, CEO of SABA

A positive development is the National Gambling Board’s (NGB) call for expressions of interest published on June 30. The board is seeking service providers capable of monitoring, tracking, and reporting illegal gambling websites. The deadline for submissions was August 7, 2026. However, no specific operational timelines have been shared yet. Coleman warns that technology like website blocking should not be seen as a silver bullet. Instead, it must be part of a multi-layered strategy involving legislation, financial tracking, and consumer education to be truly effective.

Background

The debate in South Africa is often compared to international examples. SABA points to Australia’s 2017 reform of the Interactive Gambling Act, which led to the blocking of over 1,300 websites and the withdrawal of 220 operators. Replicating this success in South Africa is complicated by the position of groups like the Internet Service Providers’ Association (ISPA). The ISPA argues that any internet disruption must be part of a clear legislative framework and directed by courts rather than administrative orders. Coleman acknowledges that ISPs should not carry the sole responsibility but should be integrated into a mandated legal framework.

Socio-economic factors also play a major role. Many South Africans view gambling as a potential source of financial relief, making them vulnerable to the marketing tactics of offshore sites. These illegal platforms offer no responsible gambling safeguards, such as deposit limits or self-exclusion tools. Therefore, consumer education is a vital component of SABA's proposal. The association stresses that their push for reform is not about stifling competition but about ensuring that the protections intended by parliament are actually delivered to the citizens.

Why it matters for German players

In Germany, the situation is much more strictly controlled due to the State Treaty on Gambling 2021 (GlüStV 2021). While South Africa is still debating the legal basis for enforcement, Germany’s GGL (Gemeinsame Glücksspielbehörde der Länder) already utilizes IP-blocking and payment-blocking. German players enjoy a high level of protection when using sites on the official whitelist. This includes a cross-provider deposit limit of 1,000 Euro per month managed by the LUGAS system and a 1 Euro stake limit on virtual slots. Playing on offshore sites without a GGL license exposes players to risks like unpaid winnings and a lack of legal recourse.

What it means for GGL-licensed casinos

For operators with a German license, the South African situation reinforces the value of a regulated market with strong enforcement. Licensed providers in Germany face high taxes and must implement complex IT integrations for player protection. For this model to remain viable, the regulator must effectively combat the black market to prevent player drain. The South African experience shows that without technical and financial barriers for offshore sites, the legal market struggles. GGL-licensed casinos benefit from the German authorities' proactive stance, as it ensures fair competition and higher channelization rates.