South Africa Illegal Gambling Crackdown Needs More Than Website Blocking, Expert Warns

The National Gambling Board (NGB) is seeking a system to monitor, track, block and report illegal online gambling websites in South Africa.

However, an effective system would need to do more than simply restrict access to illegal operators. 

In an exclusive interview with SportsBoom on October 14, Zuko Sydwell Phandle, Manager: Audit and Compliance at the Eastern Cape Gambling Board, explained why technology, intelligence gathering and enforcement must work together to tackle the problem.

“I think that an effective system would need to combine a variety of domains, including technology, intelligence gathering, and enforcement capabilities rather than relying on website blocking alone,” Phandle told SportsBoom.co.za. 

South Africa Seeks a More Systematic Way to Block Illegal Gambling

The NGB issued an expression of interest on June 30, 2026, before publishing a revised notice in July, as it explored options for tackling illegal online gambling.

The Board invited providers to explain how they would identify illegal gambling websites targeting South African players, including their country of origin, licensing status and ownership. Applicants were also asked to outline how they would block those websites and report their findings to support law enforcement investigations.

The notice further requested details of potential partnerships, any approvals or licences required to operate in South Africa, and examples of similar services used in other countries.

While the initiative represents a step towards a more coordinated approach, Phandle believes the NGB still needs to establish how the proposed system would operate in practice.

“Firstly, we must welcome the effort by the NGB, long overdue. Appreciating that this is still in the conceptualisation stages where the NGB is yet to provide the (what-how-who-when) since we know the why.”

The NGB has already taken action against illegal operators through its illegal gambling task team.

Its 2024/25 annual report identified 90 illegal gambling operators, of which 23 had blocked access to their websites in South Africa. The Board's 2025/26 annual report subsequently recorded 27 illegal gambling websites blocked for users in the country.

However, Phandle's assessment suggests that identifying and blocking websites is only one part of the wider challenge.

What South Africa’s Proposed Blocking System Could Do

A more comprehensive system could use technology to identify illegal gambling activity across multiple online channels, allowing regulators to respond as operators change their tactics.

“One can imagine that, in practice, the system could continuously scan the internet, social media platforms, search engines, mobile applications, advertising networks, and payment channels to identify gambling websites targeting South African players. Artificial intelligence and web-crawling tools could automatically detect suspicious operators, advertisements, mirror sites, and new domains.

“Once identified, the platform could assess whether the operator is licensed in South Africa, record evidence and preserve digital records, generate risk ratings for operators, issue alerts to regulators and law enforcement agencies, recommend blocking requests to internet service providers (ISPs), and share intelligence with financial institutions and payment processors. I am dreaming right? Yeah, but we would need a lot before we get to that point, I assume.”

Such a system could give regulators a clearer picture of how illegal operators attract customers, advertise their services and move between websites. It could also help authorities preserve evidence and share intelligence with organisations capable of taking further action.

Nevertheless, Phandle stressed that the effectiveness of the initiative should not be judged by the number of websites taken offline.

“I dare say that, ultimately, success will not be measured by how many websites are blocked, but by whether illegal operators are prevented from attracting South African players, processing payments, and undermining the regulated gambling market.”

Why Website Blocking May Not Be Enough

One of the main challenges facing regulators is that blocking a website does not necessarily prevent players from accessing the same operator through alternative routes.

Internet service providers (ISPs) can play an important role by restricting access to specified domains, limiting Domain Name System (DNS) resolution and complying with blocking orders. However, these measures can be circumvented when operators establish new domains or make their services available through other channels.

“Certainly, ISP cooperation is extremely important, but it ought to be regarded as only one component of a broader strategy. Yes, ISPs can block access to specified domains; restrict DNS resolution; and monitor compliance with blocking orders.”

Phandle warned that technological developments have made it increasingly difficult to rely on website blocking as a standalone solution.

“However, with the evolution of technology and sophisticated tools used by these guys, website blocking alone has limitations because users can often access websites through alternative domains, VPNs, or mobile applications,” Phandle said.

Instead, he believes disrupting the financial transactions that underpin illegal gambling could prove more effective.

“What then? Payment blocking is often more powerful. Why? We all know that every business is after money, therefore, if customers cannot easily deposit or withdraw funds, the attractiveness of the illegal operator is significantly reduced.”

Restricting deposits and withdrawals could therefore complement website blocking by making it harder for illegal operators to attract and retain customers, even when their websites remain accessible.

What Happens When Blocked Websites Return?

Another obstacle is the practice of domain hopping, whereby illegal operators move their services to new website addresses after existing domains have been blocked.

This forces regulators to identify replacement websites and update their restrictions, creating an ongoing cycle that requires time, expertise and financial resources.

“Unfortunately, like I said, these guys are always 10 steps ahead, so this is a common tactic known as ‘domain hopping.

“Perhaps, as regulators, to address this, we would need to adopt a dynamic blocking model rather than a once-off blocking process, this certainly requires resources financially and skills.”

A dynamic approach would allow regulators to monitor emerging domains and update blocking lists as operators attempt to restore access to South African players.

Phandle also highlighted the importance of international cooperation, given that many illegal gambling operators operate beyond the direct reach of South African authorities.

“Multistakeholder involvement would mean that authorities would also work with domain registrars, hosting providers, and international regulatory partners to suspend domains and share intelligence, using the diplomatic treaties and ties.”

Working with these organisations could help regulators target the infrastructure supporting illegal gambling websites rather than repeatedly blocking individual domains.

Could Players Move to Other Illegal Gambling Sites?

Even if regulators successfully restrict access to specific operators, there is no guarantee that affected players will switch to licensed alternatives.

Phandle believes South Africa must also consider why consumers choose illegal gambling platforms in the first place, particularly if those operators offer products or experiences that players find more appealing.

“Kill the attraction and demand. So, if legal and regulated gambling alternatives are not attractive, consumers may simply migrate from one illegal operator to another.”

This presents a broader challenge for the regulated gambling industry. Blocking individual websites may disrupt access temporarily, but reducing demand for illegal services requires a wider response.

Phandle also recommended action against illegal gambling advertising and the introduction of simpler ways for consumers to verify whether an operator is licensed in South Africa.

Making licensed operators easier to identify, while limiting the visibility of illegal alternatives, could help support enforcement efforts and encourage consumers to use regulated platforms.

What This Means for South Africa

The NGB's proposed system could represent an important development in South Africa's efforts to combat illegal online gambling. However, its effectiveness will depend on more than the technology used to identify and block websites.

A comprehensive approach would need to combine continuous monitoring, intelligence sharing, financial restrictions, enforcement and cooperation between regulators, ISPs, payment providers and international partners.

The cross-border nature of illegal gambling remains a significant obstacle, particularly when operators are based offshore and fall outside the direct jurisdiction of South African authorities.

Phandle highlighted this limitation, explaining why cooperation between the NGB and the country's provincial gambling regulators (PLAs) will be essential.

“The NGB and nine PLAs (South African regulators) may identify the operator but have limited authority to take direct action against the company itself which is offshore,” Phandle said.

Ultimately, South Africa's ability to curb illegal online gambling will depend on whether regulators can turn website identification and blocking into a broader strategy that disrupts the businesses behind those platforms and reduces their ability to reach South African players.