Despite online gaming and betting being a reality worldwide, Paulo Gonet, the Attorney General of the Republic, has once again taken legal action against the sector before the Supreme Federal Court (STF). He reiterates to the Supreme Court that online betting and gaming establishments should be outlawed again in the country.
According to the prosecutor, the current legislation creates a “serious situation of violation of fundamental rights,” given the “predatory nature of the online betting market.”
He attached the request to the records of a lawsuit questioning the constitutionality of the “Bets Law.” Minister Luiz Fux is responsible for overseeing the case. However, there is still no date set for the hearing.
Currently on the agenda is the discussion surrounding government decrees, ordered by Fux, that prohibit beneficiaries of social programs from registering on betting platforms.
The Brazilian Association for Economic Freedom (Able) stated to the Supreme Court that the measure represents a “misuse of purpose,” as well as “excessive state paternalism” and “socioeconomic segregation.”
According to the organization, the government must find a way to veto the use of funds from social programs. This, without necessarily excluding the citizen, who can choose to gamble with money from another source of income.
However, the Attorney General’s Office (AGU) told the Supreme Federal Court (STF) that this solution is operationally impossible. This is because once the benefit is transferred, the government loses control over its use.
Following a summons from Fux, at the request of Able, Gonet stated that the entity is in the process of contributing to the discussion. However, it does not have the legitimacy to make requests of a precautionary nature.
However, the Attorney General took the opportunity to insist on the idea that current regulations are insufficient to protect consumers, calling for the return of the 1941 law that considers this type of practice illegal.
Impacts of the decision on betting and Bolsa Família (family allowance program)
Experts warned that the restriction could pose constitutional risks, increase migration to the illegal market, and fail to effectively block the spread of gambling. The government’s decision reopened the debate on how to balance combating gambling addiction, social protection, and respect for individual freedoms.
