Kok Keng Lau: “Asia’s gambling sector has seen marked divergence in jurisdictional approaches”

In an exclusive interview with Focus Gaming News, Kok Keng Lau analyses regulatory divergence, compliance priorities and the growing role of technology shaping Asia’s gaming markets heading into 2026.

Exclusive interview.- Asia’s gambling landscape continues to fragment as jurisdictions pursue sharply different regulatory, technological and consumer-protection strategies. In this exclusive interview with Focus Gaming News, Kok Keng Lau, head of Intellectual Property, Sports and Gaming at Rajah & Tann Singapore, reviews key developments across major markets, from the Philippines’ regulatory reset and Singapore’s high-compliance model to stalled reforms in Thailand and the evolving frameworks in Vietnam, Sri Lanka and the UAE. Looking ahead, Lau outlines the compliance pillars and policy choices that will define sustainable growth across the region.

Looking back at 2025, how would you assess the state of Asia’s gambling industry across regulation, market performance, technology, and consumer protection?

In 2025, Asia’s gambling sector has seen marked divergence in jurisdictional approaches. The Philippines has moved decisively by dismantling offshore POGOs, formalising domestic e‑gaming under PAGCOR with lower fees and tighter payment/AML controls. Macau continues its pivot from VIP to premium mass under concession obligations, with DICJ data showing sustained mass gaming‑led momentum. Singapore preserves a high‑compliance regime with strict domestic controls (entry levies, exclusions, visit limits) alongside IR expansions at Marina Bay Sands and Resorts World Sentosa. Japan made advancements in the Osaka IR on a long‑dated schedule following MLIT approvals, targeting opening in the early 2030s. Thailand’s Entertainment Complex Bill stalled in 2025 for political reasons, as the promulgator of the Bill the Pheu Thai party, lost power.

Vietnam, on the other hand, progressed towards extending local access to casinos beyond the pilot Corona casino in Phu Quoc, allowing a five‑year locals‑play trial at The Grand Ho Tram, with policy discussions around an entry‑levy model akin to Singapore. The integrated‑resort pipeline also advanced, including approvals for an integrated resort in Van Don (Quang Ninh). In contrast, online casino‑style games remained expressly prohibited, with no comprehensive igaming framework. Meanwhile, Sri Lanka did a reset in 2025, enacting the Gambling Regulatory Authority Act, No. 17 of 2025, to create a unified regulator with powers over land‑based, ship‑based and digital gambling. The Act (effective 1 December 2025) centralises licensing, revenue collection, AML/CTF oversight, junket controls and dedicated digital/software authorisations. Betting and gambling levies increased to 18 per cent, while the casino entry fee was doubled to US$100. The August 2, 2025, opening of City of Dreams Sri Lanka in Colombo underlined a strategy to attract premium tourism, possibly targeting the Indian market.  

Technologically, regulators and operators are converging on cashless, biometric identity assurance, and AI‑enabled surveillance and monitoring. Consumer protection is increasingly codified or embedded in licence conditions in terms of exclusion programmes (self/family/third‑party), entry levies, anti‑inducement advertising rules, and trained responsible gaming ambassadors.

With Singapore’s gaming industry increasingly focused on innovation, responsible gaming, and regional competitiveness, what regulatory trends or policy shifts do you expect will shape its evolution in the coming years?

Singapore’s next phase will be defined by tighter, tech‑enabled supervision within a stable, high‑end duopoly. The Gambling Regulatory Authority (GRA) is moving to a more assertive, risk‑based licensing posture, already visible in 2025 via a shortened casino licence tenure for Resorts World Sentosa to reinforce compliance incentives. With the Chinese money laundering saga, we can expect greater emphasis on AML/CTF controls, data‑driven monitoring, and enhanced accountability for senior managers. 

The GRA has flagged integrating generative AI to automate compliance monitoring and strengthen risk scoring, with visitor‑flow modelling already in use. Policy will continue to favour premium, non‑gaming‑led growth from the two IRs, pairing large‑scale reinvestment with compliance oversight. Facilitation of cashless payments with robust identity and affordability checks can be expected. The Gambling Control Act/GRA framework will remain the backbone: exclusion of remote casino gambling, strict junket controls, and calibrated enforcement against unlicensed operators, preserving Singapore’s “gold standard” reputation while safeguarding social outcomes.

Thailand’s push to legalise casinos has repeatedly stalled throughout 2025. If the process were to be restarted, what safeguards and sequencing would you recommend to avoid past pitfalls, such as public consultation, social protections, enforcement capacity and investment criteria? What would the realistic timeframe be for Phase 1?

Thailand has just dissolved its Parliament to pave the way for elections in the first quarter of 2026. It is anyone’s guess as to whether the party that comes into power and the new Prime Minister will be pro-entertainment complex or otherwise. In any event, Thailand is now embroiled in border fighting with Cambodia, and its immediate priorities are to manage the escalating border conflict. That said, a stagnant economy, which in turn has given rise to domestic social issues, will need to be revitalised by the new government. A reconsideration of the entertainment complex proposal represents the best bet to boost the economy. 

To successfully reintroduce the entertainment complex proposal and avoid past pitfalls, the Thai government would need a structured approach that prioritises robust, transparent stakeholder and public engagement, as well as a commitment to imposing tight regulatory control, drawing lessons from models like Singapore’s. The process can start with an independent feasibility study of the regional casino market, potential economic impact, and social costs. This study should be made public to provide a data-driven rationale for the project. A broad and transparent public consultation should then follow. This may include town halls and stakeholder meetings across various provinces, engaging religious groups, civil society, academics and local residents, providing clear and simple information about entertainment complexes, potential benefits and measures to address social risks, addressing misinformation spread previously, and inviting comments.  A socio-economic impact assessment should also be undertaken, in addition to the establishment of a Responsible Gambling framework. The Entertainment Complex Bill can then be reviewed for necessary amendments, which take into account public feedback and concerns, and which incorporate licensing criteria and social safeguards. Finally, a preliminary Request for Information exercise should be conducted to elicit and gauge the level of interest in establishing Thai Entertainment Complexes by world-class developers and international operators.  An achievable timeframe for doing all this will be between 12-18 months, as some of these activities can take place concurrently.

As the UAE’s regulatory framework matures under the GCGRA, what do you see as the non-negotiable compliance pillars for early entrants over the next 12–24 months, and what would you prioritise first: licensing readiness, AML/CFT controls, or local partnership strategy?

With the GCGRA framework maturing at federal level and the Wynn Al Marjan Island project publicly disclosed in operator filings, non-negotiable compliance pillars for the next 12–24 months include licensing readiness (probity checks to demonstrate eligibility, financial stability, integrity, and competence before any operations can commence), putting in place documented Responsible Gambling programmes (by providing mandatory player protection tools like deposit limits, session time limits, self-exclusion programs, and adhering to strict advertising standards to protect vulnerable populations), and aligning AML/CFT policies nd programmes to UAE laws) and FATF standards (including by implementing responsible gaming controls such as age verification, self-exclusion, playing limits, anti-inducement marketing, trained Responsible Gambling ambassadors and referral pathways, and operational integrity measures such as surveillance, incident management and dispute resolution). 

In terms of priority, it would be licensing readiness first, followed by AML/CFT and Responsible Gambling implementation, and then local partnership strategy. While a local presence is a requirement for licensing, the strategic development of partnerships is a commercial priority rather than an immediate regulatory one. 

Looking ahead to 2026, where do you see the main opportunities and challenges for operators, suppliers, and regulators in Asia? 

The Philippines’ domestic e‑gaming market will operate under tightened oversight, Singapore’s two integrated resorts will continue to shine on the back of a strong economy and a stable political system, Macau’s mass‑market model will remain resilient, and Vietnam will experience a lift with its casinos welcoming locals. New demand will largely be driven by mobile experiences, live‑dealer formats and AI‑powered personalisation, while suppliers can take advantage of new compliance requirements fuelled by technological advancements in areas such as biometric KYC, transaction monitoring, Responsible Gambling analytics and crypto risk controls. Challenges include heightened AML expectations, compliance costs and enforcement against offshore platforms and illegal advertising.

In an exclusive interview with Focus Gaming News, Kok Keng Lau analyses regulatory divergence, compliance priorities and the growing role of technology shaping Asia’s gaming markets heading into 2026. Exclusive…