The Supreme Court of Nigeria has made a landmark ruling by nullifying the National Lottery Act of 2005, deeming it unconstitutional. This decision was reached on November 22, 2024, during a session led by Justice Mohammed Idris and supported by a unanimous seven-member panel.
In its ruling, the apex court stated that the National Assembly lacks the authority to legislate on matters concerning lotteries and games of chance. Justice Idris emphasized that such legislative power resides exclusively with the state Houses of Assembly. “The National Assembly does not have the jurisdiction to make laws regarding lotteries and games of chance,” he remarked during the judgment delivery.
The court's decision effectively means that the National Lottery Act will no longer be enforceable across all states in Nigeria, with the sole exception being the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), where the National Assembly is constitutionally empowered to legislate. The ruling stems from a legal challenge initiated in 2008 by Lagos State and several other states, which questioned the constitutionality of the Act.
Justice Idris elaborated on the implications of this ruling, stating, “This judgment reinforces the federal principle of states’ autonomy over specific legislative matters.” The court’s determination highlights a significant shift in how lottery regulations will be managed in Nigeria, as states now regain control over this aspect of governance.
The lawsuit that led to this ruling was filed nearly 16 years ago, reflecting ongoing tensions between state and federal jurisdictions. The nullification of the National Lottery Act is expected to reshape the landscape of gaming and lottery operations within Nigeria, allowing individual states to establish their own regulations and frameworks.
Legal experts and stakeholders in the gaming industry are closely monitoring this development, as it could lead to varied regulatory environments across different states. This ruling could also spark discussions about further clarifications on legislative powers between state and federal authorities.
Comments