According to Sulemana Briamah, “the Attorney-General’s advice could have diverse implications. But given the terrible nature of the licensing deal, both commercially and legally, the least expected outcome will be advice that makes it possible for the NLA to earn millions of cedis from its 5/90 lotto sold online. The current Director-General of the NLA has already told Parliament that the NLA can earn more from the deal.”
One may ask: if Sulemana Briamah truly knows that the NLA–KGL deal can never be cancelled on commercial and legal grounds, why did he persistently demonize KGL on his Facebook page?
Let me also take this opportunity to rebut some of the erroneous claims put forward by Sulemana Briamah as we await the Attorney-General’s advice on the NLA–KGL licensing deal.
- Misinterpretation of Act 722 on Lottery Operations
Under Act 722, the mandate of the NLA to conduct or operate lottery in Ghana is not the same as the mandate to sell or retail lottery.
According to Section 4(1) of Act 722, “a person other than the Authority shall not operate any form of lottery.” However, Section 35(2) states that “the Authority shall not retail lotto coupons to lotto stakers.”
To operate or conduct lotto simply means organizing lotto draws for the public. It does not involve selling or retailing lotto products.
KGL does not operate or conduct the 5/90 National Lotto. KGL only retails or sells the 5/90 National Lotto.
This clearly demonstrates that Sulemana Briamah lacks a proper understanding of the laws and their interpretation governing the operation, conduct, retail, and management of the 5/90 National Lotto.
- Admission of KGL’s Status
We thank God that Sulemana Briamah has finally admitted that KGL is indeed a licensed Lotto Marketing Company (LMC).
- Misapplication of Section 28 of Act 722
Section 28 of Act 722 provides that “a Lotto Marketing Company of National Lotto shall be paid commission determined by the Board.”
However, this provision applies only to Lotto Marketing Companies operating through kiosks using Point of Sale Terminals (POSTs). The pre-financing arrangements for selling lottery products online—via USSD and web platforms—are fundamentally different.
Online lottery operations require:
Partnerships with Mobile Network Operators (MNOs)
Specialized ISO-certified infrastructure
By contrast, kiosk-based Lotto Marketing Companies rely on NLA-partnered technical service providers such as Lots Services Ghana Limited and Simnet Ghana Limited, as well as NLA-partnered banks for credit pre-financing.
Furthermore, Section 28 cannot practically apply to Lotto Marketing Companies whose licenses are deemed collaborations under Section 2(4) of Act 722, where losses from such collaborations “shall not be compensated for by the State or from the Lotto Account provided for under Section 32.”
- Applicability of Section 32(2) to Online Lottery
Section 32(2) of Act 722 states that “the proceeds of sale of coupons of National Lotto… shall be paid into the Lotto Account.”
Digital lottery tickets or online lottery tickets are not the same as physical lotto coupons. Therefore, it is impractical to apply this provision directly to online lottery operations.
Additionally, which existing laws give the NLA direct authority to control, supervise, regulate, and monitor the platforms of Mobile Network Operators?
- Payment of Winnings and Commissions Under Section 32(3)
Section 32(3) of Act 722 states that “the Authority shall pay out of the Lotto Account prize monies for winners of National Lotto and commissions to Lotto Marketing Companies licensed by the Authority.”
The NLA does not have jurisdictional or supervisory authority over MNO platforms to directly pay winners of online lottery tickets. Even the National Communications Authority (NCA), under Act 769, does not have the power to directly transfer funds to mobile money vendors or beneficiaries.
Therefore, Section 32(3) applies only to Lotto Marketing Companies operating through kiosks using POSTs.
This position is further supported by Regulation 13 of the Lottery Regulations, 2008 (L.I. 1948), which provides that winning online tickets are paid by the Lotto Marketing Company or partner banks, not directly by the NLA.
- Transfer to the Consolidated Fund Under Section 32(4)
Section 32(4) of Act 722 can only be implemented after full compliance with Section 32(3).
If there is no net balance in the Lotto Account after:
Payment of prize monies
Payment of commissions
Operational and capital expenditure under Section 50
then no lawful transfer can be made to the Consolidated Fund.
Between 2012 and 2020, the NLA transferred GHS 209,409,495.24 to the Consolidated Fund, yet during the same period it owed winners, Lotto Marketing Companies, service providers, and suppliers a total of GHS 233,121,889.28.
On what basis, therefore, do Fourth Estate and Sulemana Briamah blame KGL for NLA’s failure to transfer funds to the Consolidated Fund? There is absolutely no factual or legal basis for such claims.
- Decline in Contributions Since 2019
The alleged decline in NLA’s contribution to the Consolidated Fund since 2019 has nothing to do with KGL.
Since 2019, KGL has paid over GHS 500 million to the NLA. If the NLA fails to transfer these funds to the Consolidated Fund, how can KGL be blamed? That is not how public accountability works.
- Editorial Oversight
You omitted content under point 8 before moving on to point 9. Please ensure proper review of your articles before publication.
- Incorrect Figures for 2018
In 2018, the NLA transferred approximately GHS 33.9 million to the Consolidated Fund, not GHS 37.1 million as claimed.
- Timing of the NLA–KGL Deal
The NLA–KGL deal was signed in November 2019. How, then, could KGL’s operations have affected NLA’s profits or transfers earlier that year?
- Provisional Licensing Period
KGL operated under a provisional license from 2019 to 2021. On what basis can anyone blame KGL for NLA’s inability to transfer funds to the Consolidated Fund?
Moreover, KGL is not the only company licensed by the NLA. There are over 20–50 licensed lottery operators in Ghana. How much does the NLA earn from them?
In 2014, the NLA transferred only GHS 11.8 million to the Consolidated Fund. Was KGL responsible for that decline as well?
- Questionable Motives
Are you disappointed that KGL did not fail, or are you simply uncomfortable with its success?
KGL makes less profit than it pays to the NLA and the GRA, yet it uses its profits responsibly to undertake impactful corporate social responsibility initiatives across Ghana.
- Financial Facts for 2024
In 2024, KGL paid GHS 157.6 million to the NLA while making only GHS 70 million in profit. Clearly, the NLA earned more than KGL.
Revenue is not the same as profit. Costs such as prize payments, marketing, IT infrastructure, and MNO fees must be deducted before any meaningful analysis is done.
- Conclusion
KGL is here to stay, to grow stronger, and to support governments in delivering value to the people of Ghana.
It is false to suggest that the NLA will bear full responsibility for paying winners if KGL ceases to exist. KGL will continue to operate, regardless of the unfounded expectations of its critics.
The Attorney-General, Dr. Dominic Ayine, is a member of the NLA Board and will provide advice in the interest of the State—not in the interest of Fourth Estate or Sulemana Briamah.
Attempts to undermine or pressure the Attorney-General will ultimately fail.
Issued by:
Razak Kojo Opoku
University Lecturer | Researcher | Former PR Manager, NLA
