Brazil’s PGR withholds position on fixed-odds betting measure before STF
Regulation2 min read
Brazil’s deputy prosecutor-general Luiz Augusto Santos Lima said at an STF public hearing on 3 November that the prosecutor-general had not yet reviewed the case challenging the provisional measure on fixed-odds betting. Justice Luiz Fux said the court could return the issue to the legislative and executive branches, and noted that the STF would need to consider eight constitutional actions if asked to rule.
_(54333425092).jpg){kind=link}
Brazil's Procuradoria-Geral da República (PGR) did not state a position on the provisional measure that banned fixed-odds betting in the country. This came at the end of a public hearing convened by Justice Luiz Fux of the Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) on 3 November. Deputy prosecutor-general Luiz Augusto Santos Lima said the prosecutor-general had not yet reviewed the case challenging the measure.
Santos Lima recalled that the PGR filed Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade (ADI) 7749 in November 2024. According to him, the central argument of that action was that regulation was not enough to protect consumers' fundamental rights and the national economy. He said the argument still stands, but that he could not go further than that. Santos Lima said he could not give any value judgement because he is not the natural prosecutor for the case, which falls to the prosecutor-general. In his view, the arguments presented at the hearing would help the head of the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office assess the matter better.
Closing the hearing, Fux said the STF sometimes lacks the institutional capacity and expertise to resolve certain disputes, but must rule once it is asked to. He said courts can at times decide not to decide and return the solution to the appropriate forum, which was reported as a signal that the issue could go back to the legislative and executive branches. Fux said the court would have to decide eight constitutional actions. He said he would take the information to the other members of the court if it is called on to decide, and that any decision would be collegiate.
Fux said the data presented at the hearing differed from, but did not contradict, the data gathered in 2024. He recalled that the earlier judgment was interrupted when a colleague requested more time to review the case. Among the hearing topics he considered most relevant were the economic and financial imbalance of contracts and illegal betting sites and organised crime. Fux said the hearings had been sufficient, but that this did not close the door to a later occasion.