Brazil's Supreme Federal Court (STF) held a public hearing on Provisional Measure 1.394, which banned betting in the country. Minister Luiz Fux opened the session on Tuesday with 34 entities present. The measure is being challenged in Direct Action of Unconstitutionality 8027, filed by the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL), which wants its effects suspended.
Ministers from the Justice, Health and Finance departments, together with the Attorney General's Office (AGU), argued the ban is needed to shield families from gambling's financial and social consequences. Justice Minister Wellington César Lima e Silva called betting platforms 'an architecture of unspeakable dependency' and described the measure as 'relevant and urgent'. AGU head Jorge Messias said the previous framework had become 'materially unconstitutional due to insufficient protection of constitutionally protected assets', adding that reviewing a policy in light of its results is the state's responsibility.
The industry pushed back on legal certainty and on the risk that prohibition drives consumers to unregulated operators. The Brazilian Institute for Responsible Gaming (IBJR) asked Fux for an injunction suspending the measure until Congress decides or the court rules on the merits. ANJL called for stricter rules instead of an outright ban. 'The country, through its Congress, opted for regulated gambling,' said IBJR representative Celso Mori. 'Now, suddenly, you change that orientation. Now you want clandestine and irregular gambling.'
The Economic Regulation Laboratory at the State University of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ) set out eight conditions that could accompany a reopening of the legal market if the measure is overturned: a ban on financing bets, including credit-funded Pix transactions; a single betting limit per taxpayer identification number across all operators; eligibility checks on users, including recipients of social benefits; better self-exclusion tools; auditable records in the Betting Management System (Sigap); advertising restrictions; mandatory funding of prevention and treatment through the public health system; and a defined catalogue of authorised bets. UERJ representative Marcello Trindade Paulo proposed a phased schedule with milestones at 180 and 360 days.
Flamengo argued for more effective regulation rather than full repeal, while Corinthians offered clubs as partners in campaigns on gambling addiction and illegal platforms. The Brazilian Paralympic Committee backed betting and age limits and greater operator responsibility for spotting compulsive behaviour. Industry and club representatives also challenged the treatment of BRL30 million ($5.5 million) authorisation fees already paid by licensed operators and the abrupt deadline for removing betting advertising. Gustavo Binenbojm, representing the Brazilian Association of Radio and Television (Abert), called the ban a reversal of an established policy, describing the original decision to regulate as 'a pragmatic choice that recognised the sector's risks without handing the market over to illegality and organised crime'.
Fux will determine the next steps. The hearing produced no decision on whether the ban will be suspended, kept with added safeguards or replaced by a transition process.
