Skip to content
MONTEGRE

Consumer groups demand inclusion in Supreme Court hearing on online betting ban

Eight consumer defense organizations ask Justice Luiz Fux to allow their representatives at Tuesday's public hearing on Provisional Measure 1,394/2026.

Sources: ConJur, Jovem Pan, Valor Econômico3 sources ↓|· 2 min read
Consumer groups demand inclusion in Supreme Court hearing on online betting ban
Photo: ConJur

KEY POINTS

  • Eight consumer defense organizations requested participation in the STF hearing on the online betting ban.
  • The hearing is scheduled for Tuesday, November 3, at 10 a.m. in Brasilia.
  • Provisional Measure 1,394/2026 prohibits the operation, offer, and advertising of online betting nationwide.
  • Justice Luiz Fux expanded the participant list from 28 to 34 at the request of the Attorney General's Office.
  • The consumer groups say the schedule currently excludes representatives of those who place bets.

Eight consumer defense organizations have demanded participation in the public hearing scheduled by the Supreme Federal Court for Tuesday, November 3, at 10 a.m. in Brasilia. The hearing will discuss Provisional Measure 1,394/2026, issued by President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva's government, which bans the operation, offer, and advertising of online betting across the country. Justice Luiz Fux, rapporteur of Direct Action of Unconstitutionality 8,027, convened the session.

The consumer groups filed participation requests on Friday, October 30, but said none had been reviewed by that evening. They asked Fux to examine the petitions before the hearing and permit representatives to attend, including by videoconference. If there is no time for presentations, they proposed scheduling another date to hear consumer and civil society representatives.

“The hearing, as it stands, will hear the sector that exploits betting, the sport that receives its sponsorship, the broadcasters that air its advertising, and the state that regulates it. It will not hear those who represent those who bet.”

— The signatory consumer defense organizations

The organizations are Brasilcon, the Brazilian Institute for Consumer Defense (Idec), the National Association of Consumer Public Prosecutors (MPCon), and the National Forum of Civil Entities for Consumer Defense. They argue that without them, the debate will hear the betting sector, the sports that receive its sponsorship, the broadcasters that air its advertising, and the state that regulates it, but not those who represent bettors.

The initial schedule included 28 participants, such as public bodies, betting and lottery associations, TV broadcasters, business entities, ten football clubs, the Brazilian Football Confederation, and the Brazilian Olympic Committee. The consumer groups cited Article 154 of the STF Internal Rules, which provides for the indication of speakers and participation of different opinion currents when there are positions for and against the matter.

On Sunday, November 1, Justice Fux expanded the participant list at the request of the Attorney General's Office. The ministries of Health and Justice and Public Security were added, along with the Brazilian Supermarkets Association, the Brazilian Paralympic Committee, the National Federation of Professional Football Athletes, and Gremio. The hearing now has 34 participants.

The Attorney General's Office argued that the initial composition favored betting companies and sports entities without sufficient space for other perspectives. Of the 26 institutions initially summoned on October 26, 17 were football clubs or representatives of betting companies. Fux had previously added the Brazilian Olympic Committee and the Ministry of Sport, raising the total to 28 before the latest expansion.

COMMENTS (0)

0/2000

No comments yet. Be the first.

RELATED STORIES

This page was compiled with AI assistance from the outlets named above and passed an automated language check before publication. Montegre has no reporters of its own; the byline names the outlets the story was compiled from. Method and editorial standards