The National Gambling Board (NGB) of South Africa is on the lookout for a service provider to oversee the monitoring, blocking, tracking, and reporting of illegal online gambling websites that are targeting local consumers.
Originally published on June 30, the expression of interest (EOI) was modified on July 17, with the application deadline pushed from August 7 to September 4, 2026, following a briefing session held for potential bidders on July 15.
The illegal online gambling sector in South Africa is significant, with research from Yield Sec, commissioned by the South African Bookmakers' Association (SABA), indicating that approximately 62% of online gambling activities in the country involve illegal operators. This illegal market sees over R50 billion (approximately $3.1 billion) in gross gambling revenue flowing out of the country each year.
During a recent briefing to parliament's Portfolio Committee on Trade, Industry, and Competition, acting CEO Lungile Dukwana mentioned that South Africa has yet to finalize any national policy regarding interactive gambling. He acknowledged the necessity of developing a legal framework for online gambling and reported that the board is in discussions with the National Gambling Policy Council on this matter.
In an interview with Business Day TV, Dukwana commented on the mixed feelings about blocking illegal sites, stating that while some view it as technically and legally challenging, others believe it is overdue. He characterized the procurement as primarily a scoping exercise aimed at understanding the market landscape.
The service proposed in the EOI would profile and monitor illegal gambling sites targeting South African consumers, including their origins, licensing status, and ownership. The winning provider would be responsible for blocking these identified sites, reporting them to the NGB for law enforcement, and ensuring they remain blocked if they attempt to reemerge.
The NGB bases this initiative on its obligations under the National Gambling Act, which mandates assistance to provincial licensing authorities in identifying unlicensed gambling operations. The board firmly believes that enhancing its capacity to effectively block these websites will significantly contribute to reducing illegal gambling activities.
Currently, interactive gambling remains illegal in South Africa. Although the 2008 National Gambling Amendment Act sought to implement a licensing system for this sector, it has yet to come to fruition. The EOI stresses that the illegal interactive gambling market continues to thrive despite explicit legal prohibitions.
Rather than a one-time effort, the NGB envisions a continuous capability for blocking these illegal sites every time they attempt to target local players. The provider will also need to deliver pertinent information to law enforcement, enabling authorities to penalize the operators.
It's important to note that the EOI does not guarantee a contract will be awarded. Instead, it seeks expressions of interest from companies willing to engage in a subsequent Request for Proposal (RFP) or tender process. The NGB intends to utilize the responses received to formulate the specifications for future tenders without any binding obligation to the service providers.
Prospective bidders are only required to submit a company profile, a tax clearance certificate (if they are not an international provider), along with any necessary certifications or licenses.
In response to the EOI, the Internet Service Providers’ Association (ISPA) has openly criticized the idea of mandated blocking. They argue that South African law does not currently support imposing such requirements without a comprehensive legislative framework.
Following the announcement of the EOI, ISPA issued a position paper opposing administrative blocking of online platforms. ISPA chair Sasha Booth-Beharilal emphasized the necessity of implementing such measures within a clear legal framework that addresses balancing communication rights against the risks of harmful content.
While ISPA acknowledges that blocking certain illegal content may be necessary, they insist on the need for a solid legal foundation, judicial oversight, and defined timelines for any such obligations. They also voiced skepticism about the efficacy of blocking methods, particularly domain-name and IP-address blocking, highlighting instances where these measures have led to unintended consequences, such as blocking legitimate sites.
Current NGB resources dedicated to monitoring illegal gambling remain limited. In a written response provided to the National Assembly, the Minister of Trade, Industry, and Competition indicated that the board had allocated only two personnel and approximately R596,000 to the identification of illegal gambling websites for the financial year 2025/26, noting that its database currently contains 90 illegal gambling websites, all operated by offshore entities.
The Ministry clarified that the NGB does not engage directly with the operators of illegal sites, revealing that none of the ten websites the board referred to Google Africa for de-indexing had been removed as of the response date. Despite the NGB's intervention, 23 out of the 90 identified operators managed to block access to their sites but are still accessible through evasive techniques.
Dukwana noted that efforts to remove sites with the assistance of Google and Meta have been ineffective, as these sites frequently reappear. He indicated that the tracking capability proposed in the EOI aims to tackle this recurring problem.
Sean Coleman, CEO of SABA, expressed support for the procurement initiative but warned against perceiving it as a standalone solution. He remarked that while website blocking is crucial, it should not be considered a definitive answer, as illegal operators can swiftly create mirror or replacement sites.
The EOI instructs bidders to outline their operational requirements, including necessary methodologies, partnerships, and potential revenue streams to sustain the service. This request places a demanding burden on prospective bidders without guaranteeing a future contract.
The NGB did not respond to specific inquiries regarding the EOI, reiterating that the procurement process remains active, and submissions are still under consideration. They conducted a formal session to provide applicants with the same information about the EOI, stressing that sharing further details could compromise the fairness of the process.
