Minister Gilmar Mendes, from the STF (Supreme Federal Court), requested a review of the new Sports Betting Law and, consequently, suspended the process.
Therefore, by asking for a view, Gilmar Mendes is seeking more time to analyze the case, which involves governors from six states and the Federal District.
States’ claim
The governors claim that the changes proposed in the law restrict the participation of economic groups, making it difficult to operate lottery services in more than one region.
For state leaders, this rule “reduces the participation of companies in tenders and favors an environment of competition between states, in which some tend to lose more than others”.
Furthermore, there are restrictions regarding concessions and criticism regarding the new advertising rules. In other words, the promotion of betting services outside the state where they are offered will be prohibited.
“The current rule prohibits advertising about the betting service from being broadcast in a state other than the one in which the service is actually provided,” the governors say in their document.
The rapporteur’s vote
But the only one to speak out so far was the rapporteur, minister Luiz Fux. He accepted the request and highlighted that the prohibition on the sale of lottery services from one state to another does not justify limiting the advertising strategies that each state can adopt.
So, Fux argued that advertising freedom must be aligned with the states’ business planning. “Once the commercialization, both physical and digital, of lottery services by a State is prohibited by a State to people physically located in another unit of the federation, there is no valid justification, in my opinion, for the States to be prevented from adopting advertising strategies that best suit them. make sense.”
The trial, which takes place in the virtual plenary session of the STF, has general repercussions. This means that any decision made will directly influence other courts across the country. In virtual mode, there are no direct discussions between ministers; they just cast their votes into the Court system.
Implications of the STF decision for the future of sports betting
However, when a request for a review occurs, as was the case with Minister Gilmar Mendes, the trial is automatically suspended. Thus, when he finishes his analysis, he casts his vote and moves on to voting for the next minister. If there is a prominent request, the physical plenary of the Supreme Court discusses the investigation immediately.
Everyone awaits the Supreme Court’s decision with great expectation, as it could define new rules and guidelines for sports betting in Brazil. The governors, when filing the action, aim to guarantee fair competition between the states.
Furthermore, they want to ensure that the rules are not detrimental to tax collection and the local economy. Many see the new sports betting legislation as a chance to strengthen the industry, although concerns about the impact on state revenues also arise.
Therefore, the result of this trial could shape the future of betting in Brazil. The objective of the law is precisely to provide clarity on how states may, or may not, commercially explore this sector. But one thing is certain, the outcome of this case promises to have an impact on the entire country and consequences for legislation and commercial practices.