KGL Retails 5/90 National Lotto, Doesn't Operate It

A University Lecturer and former Public Relations Manager of the National Lottery Authority (NLA), Mr Razak Kojo Opoku, has clarified that KGL does not operate the 590 national lotto but rather retails it.

Mr Opoku explained that the National Lotto Act, 2006 (Act 722) distinguishes between conducting and selling a lottery. Section 4(1) of the Act prohibits anyone other than the NLA from operating a lottery, while Section 35(2) prevents the NLA itself from directly retailing lotto coupons.

“To operate or conduct lotto simply means to organize Lotto Draws for the public, and this has nothing to do with selling or retailing lotto,” he emphasized, arguing that criticisms leveled against KGL regarding operation of the lotto are misplaced.

The statement further points out that recent acknowledgement by Sulemana Briamah, that KGL is a licensed Lotto Marketing Company (LMC) validates this position. It raises questions about the basis for accusations against KGL, particularly concerning its impact on NLA’s financial contributions.

Section 28 of Act 722 stipulates that Lotto Marketing Companies are paid commission determined by the Board. However, the statement questions if this applies to online LMCs dealing via USSD and web platforms, given the different pre-financing models compared to traditional kiosk-based sales.

According to Mr Opoku, online lottery marketing requires partnerships with Mobile Network Operators (MNOs) and specialized ISO certification, unlike traditional LMCs that rely on NLA-partnered Technical Service Providers and pre-financing through banks.

The statement also delves into complexities regarding commission payments under Section 2(4) of Act 722, which stipulates that losses from collaborations are not compensated by the state. It questions how the NLA can fulfill its obligations to both traditional and online LMCs within this legal framework.

Further dissecting the Act, the statement highlights Section 32, which deals with the Lotto Account. It asks how this section, relating to coupon sales, effectively governs the digitalized lottery ticket space. It also questions the NLA’s ability to directly control or regulate MNO platforms, and to directly pay digital lottery winners without jurisdictional power over those platforms.

According to Regulation 13(3) of the Lottery Regulations, 2008 (L.I. 1948), prize payments for online lotteries are the responsibility of the LMC or partner bank. Regulation 13(11) allows the Board to designate LMCs to validate and pay claims exceeding certain amounts.

Mr Opoku argues that the implementation of Section 32(4) – transferring net balances to the Consolidated Fund – is contingent upon fulfilling Section 32(3) regarding prize payouts and commissions. He suggests that inability to transfer funds may stem from fulfilling these prior financial obligations.

Data presented reveals that from 2012-2020, the NLA transferred GH₵209,409,495.24 to the Consolidated Fund, despite being indebted to winners, LMCs, and service providers to the tune of GH₵233,121,889.28, raising questions about blaming KGL for insufficient funds.

The statement strongly refutes claims placing blame on KGL, pointing to the GH₵500 million KGL has paid to the NLA since 2019. It asks if it’s logical to blame KGL for the NLA’s inability to transfer funds *after* receiving payments from KGL.

In 2024 alone, KGL paid the NLA GH₵157.6 million while generating only GH₵70 million in profit, proving the NLA earned more from KGL. The statement challenges the lack of investigation into how the NLA utilized these funds.

It concludes by affirming KGL’s commitment to supporting the government and contributing to national development through sustainable business practices and Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives.

Image Source: MYJOYONLINE