The Goa Outdoor Advertisement (Regulations & Control) Bill, 2025, recently tabled in the Legislative Assembly, seeks to impose a streamlined regulatory framework over the erection, placement, and display of all outdoor advertisements across the State.
For the first time, the State Government aims to operationalise a geo-spatially mapped regime that eliminates arbitrary installations, enforces content-based scrutiny, and introduces a unified registration system for agencies engaged in the business of outdoor publicity.
A dedicated Goa Advertisement Regulatory Committee is to be constituted under Section 3 of the Bill. It shall comprise representatives from the Departments of Tourism, Transport, Electricity, and Public Works, besides the Directorate of Information and Publicity.
This inter-departmental mechanism is intended to review spatial compliance and recommend policy amendments from time to time.
The operational duties, however, vest in the Competent Authority, namely, the Entertainment Society of Goa, which will maintain a real-time digital register of hoardings and grant permissions for each physical and digital display device.
Every advertisement must carry a conspicuously placed Quick Response (QR) Code and a unique identification number. Devices are to be geo-tagged and their precise location mapped on the Government’s GIS-based Master Plan.
Strict penalties—ranging up to ₹1 lakh with daily penal interest—are proposed against defaulting advertisers, while unauthorised or unsafe hoardings are liable to be removed without notice.
The regime also proposes mandatory non-commercial public service messages for a limited period each year, a measure clearly intended to balance civic communication with commercial outreach.
Yet, a stark contradiction between policy and reality emerges when one travels along the NH-66 bypass, particularly the stretch that skirts the outer boundary of Agacaim and runs past the St. Andre constituency up to Bambolim.
This corridor has visibly become a billboard gallery for offshore casino operators.
Several hoardings explicitly invite road users to gamble, often using bright colours, promotional visuals, and phrases designed to entice curiosity. While some displays maintain reasonable proportions, many are poorly aligned, irregularly mounted, and contain distractingly small fonts. These may seem innocuous, but their placement in a fast-moving traffic environment raises concerns over visual clutter and compromised road safety.
The proposed law does introduce restrictions on obscenity, spatial non-compliance, and aesthetic impairment, but its enforcement capacity will be tested against the sheer volume and strategic aggressiveness of such casino-linked advertising. The larger legal and ethical contradiction, however, emerges from another source altogether. Casino advertisements vs legal restrictions
The NH-66 Bypass in Goa is lined with casino advertisements, highlighting a legal inconsistency.
On one hand, Section 13G of the Goa Public Gambling (Amendment) Act, 2012 stipulates that no person other than a tourist shall have entry to designated casino areas, effectively barring Goan residents from entering local casinos.
On the other hand, these ubiquitous hoardings omit any mention of this restriction.
It is evident that the advertised services are legally inaccessible to the local population viewing them.
Such omission appears to contradict the protective spirit of the 2012 Amendment Act.
Notably, the law’s intent as articulated by state authorities was: to shield Goans from the “vices” of casino gambling.
By failing to disclose that casinos are off-limits to Goan residents, the advertisements undermine that intent and create a public policy dilemma: the State simultaneously prohibits local participation in casinos while permitting casinos to advertise broadly to the public. The case for mandatory disclaimers
This inconsistency raises questions of transparency and consumer information.
In other regulated sectors, advertisers are compelled to warn or inform the public of legal or health restrictions.
For example, Indian law mandates that tobacco products carry prominent health warnings covering 85% of their packaging, reflecting a policy decision to inform consumers about risks.
These statutory warnings serve to align marketing with public welfare.
By analogy, casino advertising in Goa should arguably carry a clear disclaimer about the entry ban on locals.
The upcoming Goa Outdoor Advertisement (Regulations & Control) Bill, 2025 provides an opportunity to address this gap.
The draft Bill already prohibits certain categories of harmful or objectionable advertisements for instance: it bans outdoor ads promoting tobacco and alcohol.
However, it does not presently require disclaimers for services that are legal yet selectively accessible.
Introducing a clause for mandatory disclaimers on casino advertisements would be consistent with the Bill’s content-regulation approach and would ensure the public is not misled by such omissions.
Aligning advertising with law and policy
It is recommended that all casino advertisements in Goa be required to prominently display a disclaimer stating that Goan residents are not permitted to enter casinos under the 2012 Act.
Such a requirement would directly cite Section 13G of the Goa Public Gambling (Amendment) Act, 2012, making the legal limitation clear to every viewer.
To enforce this, the Goa Outdoor Advertisement (Regulations & Control) Bill, 2025 should be amended to include provisions for targeted content regulation that mandate these disclaimers.
This measure would harmonise advertising practices with the law’s intent, preventing misleading or misdirected content.
In effect, it would uphold the welfare-oriented spirit behind the casino entry restrictions while still allowing casinos to advertise responsibly.
By embedding the local-entry caveat in every casino advert, the legal inconsistency would be eliminated and a more transparent, accountable advertising environment could be harnessed in line with public policy.
