Brazil justice minister defends betting measure at Supreme Court hearing
Regulation2 min read
In brief
- Justice Minister Wellington César Lima e Silva spoke at the Supreme Court hearing on Provisional Measure 1.394/2026.
- He defended the measure's relevance and urgency, which ADI 8027 challenges.
- The report said he gave no figures on blocked sites, frozen accounts or recovered sums.
- He cited links between betting and organised crime but, according to the report, presented no case or amount.

The Supreme Court (STF) held a public hearing on Provisional Measure 1.394/2026, to which government bodies including the Ministry of Justice and Public Security were summoned. Justice Minister Wellington César Lima e Silva spoke without a prepared text, as he acknowledged himself. According to the report, he did not present figures on blocked sites, frozen accounts or recovered sums.
The minister defended the relevance and urgency of the measure, requirements that are challenged in ADI 8027. He said the Executive sought to hear all the sectors involved and that no decision was taken hastily. He described a meeting with affected families as the centre of gravity of the presidential decision. The report said the regulated sector, clubs, broadcasters, workers and recreational bettors were not called to the meetings that preceded the measure.
The minister said he had found an undesirable proximity between betting activity and organised crime and money laundering. According to the report, he did not present a single case, operation or amount. He also suggested that authorised operators might run illegal activity in parallel, without naming companies or saying whether any penalty was applied.
The minister cited a Unifesp survey on 10.9 million Brazilians who bet in a risky way and 1.4 million with signs of gambling disorder. The report said the survey does not distinguish between bettors on authorised platforms and on illegal sites. A request for the enforcement figures, filed with the ministry under the access to information law on 11 October, has reportedly not been answered.