In a recent interview with iGB, Sean Coleman, the CEO of the Association of South African Bookmakers (SABA), clarified his previous remarks concerning the ongoing campaign against illegal gambling in South Africa.
Coleman emphasized that, as of now, efforts remain primarily in the advocacy and stakeholder engagement phase. "The publication of our statement was intended to contribute constructively to what we believe is an increasingly important national policy discussion rather than to suggest that legislative amendments are imminent," he stated.
He pointed out that SABA’s stance highlights a critical issue: the country currently suffers from a lack of laws that would enable effective enforcement against illegal online gambling, rather than an absence of prohibitory laws.
In July, SABA released a statement suggesting six legislative changes, including amendments to the National Gambling Act, the Electronic Communications Act, the Financial Intelligence Centre Act, and called for coordinated efforts from the Reserve Bank among other regulators.
The scope of illegal gambling in South Africa is considerable. A report commissioned by SABA from Yield Sec estimated that illegal operators constitute about 62% of online gambling activity in the country, resulting in over R50 billion in gross gambling revenue being diverted offshore annually. Shockingly, around 16 million South Africans are reported to have interacted with illegal gambling platforms over the past year.
Coleman stressed that the comprehensive nature of the proposed reforms necessitates a coordinated approach. "Our proposals touch on gambling regulation, electronic communications, payment systems and financial intelligence legislation, which means that a coordinated approach will ultimately be required," he explained.
An encouraging development from SABA’s perspective is the National Gambling Board’s (NGB) issuance of a call for expressions of interest from service providers to monitor, block, and report on illegal gambling websites. This was published on June 30 with responses due by August 7, 2026. Coleman noted that SABA had not received any further details apart from what was released in the public tender.
"Our understanding is that the National Gambling Board has commenced a procurement process for specialized services aimed at strengthening its capabilities in identifying and responding to illegal online gambling activities," he said. "Beyond what has been publicly tendered, we have not been provided with operational timelines or implementation details."
Coleman acknowledged that the move indicates a growing recognition of the importance of technology in combating illegal gambling. "What is encouraging is that this reflects an acknowledgment that technology must form part of any meaningful enforcement strategy," he asserted. He cautioned, however, that technology should be seen as one tool among many.
"SABA has consistently advocated for a multi-layered approach that combines technology, legislation and coordinated enforcement. Website blocking, while important, should not be viewed as a silver bullet," he said. Coleman suggested that, if properly implemented, technological solutions could serve as crucial elements of a broader South African strategy against illegal gambling.
Since SABA's July statement, Coleman mentioned there has been no direct communication from the Internet Service Providers’ Association (ISPA), which had previously issued a position paper advocating for any disruption of internet services to comply with a clear legislative framework. "Not that I am aware of," Coleman responded when asked about any engagement with ISPA since their last statement.
Coleman also clarified that ISPs should not be perceived as solely responsible for the fight against illegal gambling. "Our position has never been that ISPs should bear sole responsibility for combating illegal gambling. Rather, we envisage a framework where appropriately authorized and legally mandated interventions are supported by clear legislative provisions and implemented in conjunction with other enforcement mechanisms," he said.
He further asserted that discussions must move beyond whether blocking is possible, shifting focus towards developing an effective enforcement model that balances various interests: government, regulators, and industry stakeholders.
Regarding South Africa’s gambling challenges in contrast to those in Australia or the UK, Coleman highlighted the complicated regulatory landscape in South Africa, where gambling regulation exists concurrently across nine provincial licensing frameworks compared to a more cohesive national framework elsewhere.
This fragmentation complicates enforcement and regulatory coordination, especially as illegal operators increasingly localize their offerings—utilizing local languages, South African payment methods, Rand-denominated betting, and aggressive marketing tactics to project legitimacy.
Coleman remarked on the socio-economic conditions impacting consumer vulnerability, noting, "South Africa faces significant socio-economic challenges that make consumers particularly vulnerable to marketing narratives that present gambling as an alternative source of income or financial relief. Consumer education therefore becomes critically important."
He also brought attention to the intricacies added by cross-border payment systems, suggesting that enforcement strategies must adapt to technological developments that allow operators to quickly migrate services when faced with regulatory action.
Coleman underscored the need for a tailored response, one that embraces international best practices while catering to South Africa’s unique legislative and economic landscape.
When posed with the question of which specific intervention he would prioritize near-term, Coleman was cautious, emphasizing a need for a comprehensive approach. "If I were required to prioritize one intervention, it would be the establishment of an effective and legally certain mechanism to disrupt consumer access to illegal gambling platforms through coordinated technological enforcement measures," he stated. Such measures should be reinforced by a public register of licensed operators and a consumer awareness campaign.
He highlighted the urgency of taking immediate action to protect South African consumers from the risks posed by illegal gambling operators. "Every day South African consumers are being directed towards illegal operators that provide none of the protections associated with regulated gambling. Reducing accessibility immediately advances consumer protection objectives while broader reforms are pursued," he cautioned.
Lastly, Coleman dismissed claims that SABA’s advocacy serves merely to protect licensed operators from competition. "This is not a debate about protecting licensed operators from competition. It is about ensuring that South African consumers receive the protections parliament intended when it created our regulated gambling framework. If consumers are gambling, they should do so within a regulated environment that provides responsible gambling safeguards, contributes to the fiscus and operates subject to South African law."
