Brazil's Attorney General's Office has urged the Supreme Federal Court to dismiss appeals regarding the ban on betting, arguing that it is vital to maintain the restrictions in place. This request comes as the court, led by Justice Luiz Fux, reviews Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality related to the matter.
The AGU had been called upon to provide its stance following President Lula’s introduction of the betting ban through a provisional measure last month. They asserted that the Office of the Prosecutor General should be consulted within a 72-hour window before any ruling is made on petitions aiming to overturn this ban.
The AGU's response addresses a lawsuit brought to the court by the National Association of Games and Lotteries and the Brazilian Institute for Responsible Gaming, which are both fighting against the ban. The AGU claims the current betting regulation is critically flawed and ineffective in protecting minors or preventing money laundering and criminal financing.
Despite this assertion, the AGU did not consider the measures that the betting industry has implemented to combat illegal practices. Many of these illicit activities stem from unauthorized websites that do not comply with existing regulations.
Additionally, the AGU is seeking a new public hearing to reexamine the discussions that occurred in November 2024, further complicating the issue. Critics argue that the timing of the betting ban—enacted shortly before Brazil’s presidential election—serves political interests rather than public good.
The call for further hearings may intensify these concerns about electoral motivations and raises questions regarding the rushed decision by President Lula to impose such a ban.
The AGU emphasized that the attorney general's input is crucial moving forward. If the attorney general's requests are upheld, it would delay any beneficial decisions for the betting sector, potentially impacting its revenue and the tax income that the government could collect.
With elections planned for October 25, where Lula and Liberal Party leader Flávio Bolsonaro will compete for the presidency, the AGU's actions appear to delay any rulings that could support the betting industry until after this critical date.
Among the AGU's stipulations is a recommendation to either preserve the operations of authorized companies or extend the transition period by a minimum of six months. In contrast, the ANJL and IBJR argue that the disruption brought by the ban could inadvertently push bettors toward illegal gambling alternatives.
The AGU has countered claims suggesting the emergency provisional measure was unnecessary, contending it was informed by prior government experiences and the broader implications for household debt and public health, rather than a response to the court’s considerations.
Despite assertions that the ban would hinder revenue generation and resource allocation for public services, the AGU insists that the government had acknowledged the likelihood of decreased funds due to the cessation of betting activities. They further claimed that in the first week following the provisional ban, over 10,000 illegal gambling sites were blocked, with actions taken against thousands more associated with gambling.
However, the AGU did not address newly created sites that emerged post-ban, with the agency only remarking that the 18,195 websites identified did not necessarily correlate with the timing of the provisional measure’s enactment.
On addressing allegations regarding disruptions to free enterprise, the AGU maintained that operations would be conducted based on approvals from the Ministry of Finance, which retains the right to review these authorizations at any time.
