Gonet asks the STF to suspend actions against the MP for the end of betting until the Court decides on a ban

The Attorney General of the Republic, Paulo Gonet, asked the Federal Supreme Court (STF) to suspend, throughout the country, legal proceedings that discuss the constitutionality of the provisional measure (MP) that prohibited the operation of betting in Brazil.

The request was presented on Friday (6) to Minister Luiz Fux, rapporteur of four actions that question the MP published by President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) in the Supreme Court.

In the demonstration, Gonet cites decisions taken by lower courts that allowed certain platforms to continue operating despite the ban. For him, the existence of different processes discussing the validity of the measure generates "legal uncertainty and asymmetric application of the norm".

"The proliferation of legal proceedings regarding the constitutional validity of Provisional Measure No. 1,394/2026, despite the issue already being reviewed by the Federal Supreme Court, causes a situation of legal uncertainty and asymmetrical application of the rule in relation to its recipients", he stated.

If Fux accepts the request, ongoing actions in other instances of Justice will be paralyzed while the STF analyzes the validity of the ban.

The Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region (TRF-3), in São Paulo, overturned on Friday (6) the authorization for three betting shops to resume operating in Brazil from this Thursday (5).

Casa de Apostas, one of the three platforms benefiting, already had its website up and running on Friday morning. The company had been prevented from operating in the country after the federal government banned betting.

In the decision, the president of TRF-3 Johonsom Di Salvo highlights that "the issue of 'Bets' in relation to the Provisional Measure is sub judice of the Federal Supreme Court, and it is inconvenient for public order for the lower courts to anticipate understandings".

The company had its request denied twice by federal judges, but appealed to the TRF-3 and obtained an injunction, a provisional decision. The Federal Attorney General's Office (AGU) appealed the decision that allowed the operation of online betting houses belonging to the company CDA Gaming.

The discussion in court began after the MP banned the exploration, offering, intermediation and advertising of fixed odds bets across the country. The fence also reached online gaming and virtual casinos.

The MP was published on September 25th and ordered the closure of operations. Betting sites began to be blocked on October 6th. On October 8, the São Paulo Federal Court allowed the Stake platform to continue operating temporarily, until October 25.

The authorization only lasted one day. On October 9, the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region (TRF-3) responded to a request from the Union and suspended the injunction that allowed Stake to operate.

The Federal Attorney General's Office (AGU) argued that the decision created an unequal situation in the market because it allowed a single company to continue operating while the others were subject to the ban.

The president of TRF-3, federal judge Luis Antonio Johonsom di Salvo, pointed out "regulatory asymmetry" when suspending the decision.

Four direct actions of unconstitutionality question the MP in the STF. The actions were presented by entities representing the gaming and lottery sector and by an association of mayors and vice-mayors.

Among the arguments presented against the measure are the absence of the urgency requirement for issuing a provisional measure, violation of legal certainty and free initiative and interference with previously granted authorizations.

Sector entities also alleged to the STF that companies made investments to meet the requirements established by the government itself to operate legally in the country, including the payment of R$30 million per license.

The AGU, on the other hand, defended the validity of the ban and asked the Supreme Court to reject the questions.

The STF held a public hearing on November 3 called by Fux to discuss the impacts of the ban.

Now, in addition to analyzing the questions against the MP, Fux will decide whether to comply with the PGR's request to interrupt the processes that discuss the same topic in other instances of Justice until a decision is made by the Supreme Court.