Bangladesh’s new Gambling Prevention Bill covers 24 activities, listing 14 categories of penalties

Dig Deeper

The Backstory

Bangladesh moves from colonial-era law to digital enforcement

Bangladesh’s Gambling Prevention Bill marks a significant escalation in the country’s response to online betting, replacing a 19th-century statute with a framework built for digital platforms, remote payments and social media promotion. The law’s passage on June 30 did not emerge in isolation. It followed months of judicial pressure, police action and political concern over the scale of online gambling in a country where gambling has long been illegal but enforcement tools were widely seen as outdated.

The former Public Gambling Act of 1867 was designed for physical gambling houses, not offshore websites, mobile apps, influencer marketing or cross-border payment flows. Lawmakers’ decision to define 24 gambling-related activities and 14 categories of penalties reflects a broader shift across Asia: Governments are no longer treating illegal betting as a street-level vice issue but as a technology, banking, consumer protection and public order problem.

The stakes are substantial. Bangladesh authorities have framed online gambling as a social risk, particularly for younger users, while critics have warned that expanded search, seizure and website-blocking powers could test civil liberties if not subject to sufficient oversight. That tension — between rapid enforcement and procedural safeguards — is now at the center of the country’s gambling policy.

Court pressure helped force the issue

The legislation followed a direct intervention from the judiciary. In May, the Bangladesh High Court ordered the government to explain what steps it was taking to curb online gambling advertising and promotion. The order required multiple agencies, including police, telecommunications regulators and key ministries, to file an affidavit within 30 days detailing their response.

That case stemmed from a legal notice served on April 16 by the Law and Life Foundation Trust, which called on the government to close online gateways to gambling. After authorities did not respond, the organization filed a writ petition. The court also asked why the government should not be required to create a 24/7 monitoring team to track online gambling activity.

The court action underscored a gap between Bangladesh’s formal prohibition of gambling and the practical realities of digital enforcement. While gambling was already considered a criminal offense under national law, online operators, affiliates and advertisers were able to reach users through websites, apps and social media channels. Reports cited in the proceedings suggested the social impact was widening, with one estimate putting the number of people affected by gambling addiction in the millions.

The High Court’s order, covered in Bangladesh’s court-mandated review of online gambling advertising, helped move the issue from general concern to a concrete compliance deadline. That pressure likely strengthened the case for a dedicated gambling law rather than piecemeal provisions in cybercrime legislation.

Police action exposed the scale of the network

Before the new bill passed, enforcement agencies had already begun testing stronger tools under the Cyber Security Ordinance 2025. The Criminal Investigation Department launched a national crackdown on illegal online gambling, saying it had identified more than 1,000 agents allegedly involved in gambling transactions. Their names were referred to Bangladesh Bank for further action, highlighting the central role of payment channels in sustaining illegal betting operations.

The CID’s approach showed how gambling enforcement had moved beyond arresting individual bettors. Investigators were targeting agents, transaction networks and digital platforms that could move money quickly and operate across jurisdictions. The agency also urged the public to avoid gambling sites and apps, report suspicious platforms to the Cyber Police Centre and raise awareness among young people.

That earlier national crackdown on online gambling transactions provided a preview of the enforcement model now embedded in the Gambling Prevention Bill. The new law gives authorities broader power to investigate, seize property and block access to platforms. Supporters argue those tools are necessary because evidence can disappear quickly online, while opponents say such powers should be checked by courts before use.

The timing also matters. On the same day lawmakers passed the Gambling Prevention Bill, they approved amendments removing gambling-related provisions from the Cyber Security Act. That sequencing suggests Bangladesh is consolidating gambling enforcement into a specialized statute, reducing reliance on broader cybercrime rules that may not be tailored to the specific mechanics of betting, sports wagering, casino games and digital promotion.

Asia’s wider crackdown is tightening around promotion

Bangladesh is not alone in treating online gambling promotion as an enforcement priority. Hong Kong recently arrested model and adult film actress Erena So Hoi-lam for allegedly promoting an offshore gambling website through social media. Police said the platform recruited local personalities as brand ambassadors and offered sports betting, esports, online slots, table games and live dealer products, even though online gambling is illegal in Hong Kong.

The case is relevant to Bangladesh because it highlights a central challenge for regulators: Offshore operators often use local influencers, regional branding and social platforms to reach customers without holding domestic authorization. So reportedly said she believed the site was registered in Malaysia and that campaigns targeted Asian audiences broadly, not Hong Kong specifically. Authorities took the position that promotion accessible in Hong Kong could still violate local law.

That enforcement logic mirrors the concerns behind Bangladesh’s new law. If illegal gambling is distributed through mobile apps, social media ads, affiliate links and local payment agents, authorities need to address not only the operator but also the promotional and transactional ecosystem around it. The Hong Kong arrest tied to alleged online gambling promotion shows how police agencies in the region are expanding scrutiny to intermediaries who help platforms acquire customers.

For Bangladesh, this raises difficult questions about proportionality. A broad definition of facilitation may help deter offshore operators from using local promoters, but it can also create uncertainty for advertisers, content creators and technology providers. The country’s new penalty structure, which includes higher prison terms for online and remote gambling offenses, suggests lawmakers are prioritizing deterrence as digital access accelerates.

Regulation, prohibition and the tax question

Bangladesh’s approach contrasts sharply with the Philippines, where the government is considering tighter oversight of licensed igaming rather than a blanket prohibition model. Finance Secretary Ralph Recto has said policymakers are reviewing whether online gaming operators licensed by the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corp. should be required to list on the Philippine Stock Exchange to improve transparency around ownership and operations.

That proposal, reported by the Philippine government’s review of public listing rules for igaming firms, is part of a wider debate over taxes, fees and compliance in a market where legal operators generate government revenue. The Department of Finance has also considered higher remittance rates and taxes that could raise billions of pesos annually. Listed companies would face additional disclosure obligations, including information about finances and beneficial owners.

The Philippine debate illustrates a different policy trade-off. Legalization can bring revenue, regulatory visibility and consumer safeguards, but it also requires governments to manage addiction risks, money laundering concerns and political backlash. Bangladesh has chosen the opposite route: tougher criminal penalties and expanded enforcement against both operators and participants.

Those divergent models show why online gambling policy is becoming a broader governance issue. Countries must decide whether to regulate, tax and supervise online betting or attempt to suppress it through criminal law and technological blocking. Bangladesh’s new bill places it firmly in the prohibition camp, but the practical challenge remains similar to that faced by regulated markets: identifying operators, tracking funds, preventing harm and keeping illegal platforms from exploiting gaps in enforcement.

Sports integrity adds another layer

The Bangladesh bill also addresses match-fixing, placing sports integrity within the same enforcement framework as online betting and casino-style gambling. That reflects a growing recognition that digital wagering can create incentives for corruption in sports, especially when betting markets operate outside regulated oversight.

Florida lawmakers have been wrestling with a related issue from a different angle. A proposed bill there would legalize daily fantasy sports while creating third-degree felony penalties for athletes, coaches or staff who provide insider information or engage in match fixing. The measure would also define which fantasy contests are legal and bar formats tied to casino games, single-game props, college sports and high school sports.

The Florida proposal linking fantasy sports regulation with match-fixing penalties shows how integrity protections are increasingly bundled into gambling legislation, whether the jurisdiction is legalizing a product or cracking down on it. Bangladesh’s inclusion of match-fixing in its new law reflects the same concern: Betting markets can affect conduct on the field, not only behavior on gambling platforms.

For Bangladesh, implementation will determine whether the law becomes an effective deterrent or a source of enforcement controversy. Authorities now have a clearer statutory basis to pursue online operators, payment agents, promoters and match-fixing schemes. But the concerns raised in Parliament over warrantless searches, seizures and website blocking are likely to persist. The bill answers the question of whether Bangladesh intends to tolerate online gambling. The harder test will be how it enforces that answer.