A full decade after promising to shield youngsters from the lure of gambling, the Goa government has finally notified the rules under the Goa Public Gambling Act. The Home Department’s notification, issued on Thursday, formally bars anyone under 21 from entering designated casino gaming areas. Also, it has introduced a stiff 18 per cent annual penal interest on casino operators who fail to pay their Annual Recurring Fees (ARF) on time. On the surface, the government appears to be tightening both social safeguards and financial accountability. However, a closer look reveals that these moves create an illusion of strong regulation while leaving critical loopholes untouched.
Firstly, the biggest weakness lies in the way the casino ban for youngsters has been viewed. While those under 21 are prohibited from entering gaming zones, they are still allowed to board offshore casino vessels. That distinction may appear reasonable on paper, but it falls apart in practice. These floating casinos are not conventional entertainment venues, but carry a distinct gambling vibe. Allowing minors and young adults to board the vessels for meals, events, or other activities inevitably exposes them to an alluring gambling environment. Even if they may not be allowed to place a bet, such proximity dilutes the very objective of keeping young minds away from gambling.
Secondly, enforcement remains the weakest link. The amended rules bank on a Gaming Commissioner to monitor daily digital visitor records, but the position itself exists more in theory than in practice. Instead of establishing an independent regulator dedicated solely to keeping a vigil on casinos, the government continues to rely on officials with additional charge to shoulder the responsibility. That arrangement leaves significant grey areas unaddressed. There is little indication of robust systems to detect forged or digitally manipulated identity documents that could be used by underage visitors. Nor is there any provision for independent inspectors to conduct surprise compliance checks aboard casino vessels. In effect, much of the responsibility for enforcing the rules is left to casino operators themselves.
The same pattern of selective enforcement is evident in the government’s financial approach. Imposing an 18 per cent penal interest on delayed ARF payments is a welcome step that should discourage future defaults. But what about the dues that casinos owe the government? The administration has said little about the enormous backlog of unpaid dues that has accumulated over the years, an issue that has been debated in the Legislative Assembly several times. Internal estimates suggest that eight onshore and offshore casino operators together owe more than Rs 314 crore, with some liabilities dating back to 2018.
While the government is keen to project a tougher stance on future compliance, its inability to resolve long-pending disputes or recover substantial public revenue undermines the intent. Penalising fresh delays while allowing historic arrears to remain unresolved reflects an inconsistent approach to financial discipline.
Ultimately, these notifications appear to prioritise regulatory optics. If the government’s objective is genuinely to protect young people from gambling and strengthen accountability within the casino sector, the reforms need to go much further by barring youth under 21 from boarding casino vessels altogether, and ensuring strict compliance.
In view of Goa’s casino culture gaining popularity, the government must consider, on priority, an independent Gaming Commissioner with the authority, resources and auditing powers to enforce the law without compromise. Without sorting out structural deficiencies, the latest rules will amount to little more than a partial fix.
