Why Oyo and Other States Should Not Allow Abuja to Hijack Their Gaming Revenues

Governments at the sub-state level are increasingly warning about the danger of ceding control of sports betting, lotteries and gaming revenues to federal authorities or overseas platforms. In Oyo State, the case is clear: gaming is a state-level matter that must be defended to protect local revenue, ensure regulation, and safeguard youth welfare.

Under existing court verdicts, states maintain exclusive jurisdiction over lotteries, betting and gaming. Oyo State’s gaming board, for instance, has long regulated licensing, storefronts, advertising and youth protection, acting on state statutes that entrust it with these powers. If states surrender revenue streams to the federal level, the direct consequences could include: diminished internally generated revenue (IGR), weaker regulation of licenced operators, and underfunded youth-protection programmes.

Officials in Oyo point out that when states lose gaming revenues, they lose the ability to: reinvest in road and health infrastructure, maintain regulatory oversight, combat illegal betting, and fight under-aged gambling. They warn that federal centralisation or outsourcing of gaming-licence-fees will leave states at a disadvantage, vulnerable to unlicensed operators and control of key decisions in Abuja rather than in state capitals.

In practical terms, Oyo’s regulations—requiring operators to pay licence fees, register stores, and adhere to youth protections—have enabled meaningful local revenue collection and oversight. Furthermore, the state has used gaming licences to capture data, prevent illegal operations, and fund programmes such as youth employment and sports development. If the balance shifts and gaming becomes federally-controlled, states stand to lose the link between participation, regulation, and local benefit.

The argument extends beyond revenue. Gaming control is also about sovereignty of service delivery. States like Oyo argue that federal-level intervention often means profit-maximisation, not citizen-protection. By retaining control, the state ensures that incomes from stakes and licences flow back into priority areas—education, public health, infrastructure—and not simply into centralised coffers.

The risk for states is that without vigilant defence of their gaming laws, licensed operations may migrate, local authorities may be sidelined, and youth protection may weaken. Oyo's message is clear: we will legislate, regulate, and collect, and we will not allow the Federal Government or private federal entities to hijack what belongs to the state’s economy and citizens.