Proibicao-de-apostas-esportivas-e-um-retrocesso-ineficaz-diz-Jose-Francisco-Manssur
Foto: Marcos Oliveira/Agência Senado

José Francisco Cimino Manssur, specialist in sports law and guest professor at USP, analyzes the regulation of sports betting and online gambling in Brazil.

Until February this year, he served as a special advisor to the Executive Secretariat of the Ministry of Treasury, responsible for regulating this sector. With this experience, he presents his vision on the topic and the recent speeches of President Lula and Rodrigo Pacheco (president of the Senate), citing a possible ban on the activity in Brazil.

In his article on the Poder 360 portal, he draws attention to the fact that more than one hundred companies demonstrated confidence in this regulation, submitting detailed requests to the Ministry of Treasury to operate in the country.

Manssur also highlights the long process that Brazil went through to regulate its betting market, culminating in Law 13,756 of 2018 and several regulatory ordinances. “International experts already recognize Brazilian regulations as one of the most modern and restrictive in the world”, he highlights.

Manssur argues: “Prohibiting betting now, even before the companies are authorized or soon after, and, especially, even before the practical results of the regulation are verified, would mean that the entire process put in place over the last 2 years would not have been valid. you are welcome and all the effort and resources of companies interested in operating in the regulated market to set up in Brazil would have been absolutely in vain”.

Possible ban on sports betting

Manssur also questions the implications of a possible ban at this time. He asks: “What image about legal security in Brazil would be transmitted to the world? From a country that regulates a certain market, requires an extensive process to obtain concessions by private parties and, even before the process itself is concluded, simply closes it? “

The expert raises practical concerns about the consequences of a possible ban. Firstly, he questions the destination of the amounts already paid for the grants. Next, Manssur addresses the impact on jobs generated by the sector.

Furthermore, he argues that the effectiveness of prohibition as a means of preventing problems is questionable. To illustrate his point, he cites the historical example of Prohibition in the United States.

In this context, Manssur suggests that the ban is not effective in combating problems such as gambling addiction. Thus, he suggests that adequate regulation can offer more significant results than prohibition.

Manssur states: “The effectiveness of a mere ban as a means of preventing people, for example, from becoming addicted to betting, is absolutely debatable.”

Lawsuit

The author also comments on a legal action filed by the CNC (National Confederation of Commerce in Goods, Services and Tourism) filed this action. Consequently, the confederation seeks to extinguish Law 14,790 of 2023.

This law, in turn, regulates betting in Brazil. However, Manssur notes that the CNC did not challenge Law 13,756 of 2018, which initially legalized online betting.

Quoting Luiz Felipe Santoro, president of the Gaming Law, Betting and Responsible Gaming Commission of the OAB/SP, reinforces: “The Confederation of Commerce wants betting to remain legal, but without any regulation, as it was from 2018 to 2022.”

Manssur concludes his argument by questioning who would be interested in a situation of legalization without regulation. Thus, he mentions that it was precisely the lack of regulation that worsened the recently disclosed problems.