ABERT asks the Supreme Court to act against a law in Rio Grande do Sul that restricts betting advertising.

The Brazilian Association of Radio and Television Broadcasters (ABERT) has joined Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) No. 7.971, which is being processed in the Supreme Federal Court (STF), requesting to act as amicus curiae . The action, proposed by the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL), questions the constitutionality of a law from Rio Grande do Sul that imposes restrictions on the advertising of sports betting in the state.

At the heart of the debate is Law No. 16.508, approved by the State of Rio Grande do Sul on Tuesday (April 24). The law establishes a series of limitations on advertising for fixed-odds betting platforms and is scheduled to come into effect on Tuesday (August 25), after a 120-day vacatio legis period.

What the law of Rio Grande do Sul prohibits

Among the most comprehensive restrictions, the law prohibits any advertising of betting between 6 am and 21 pm on television, streaming platforms , video-on-demand services, and radio. Furthermore, the legislation:

⇒ Requires warning phrases in a larger size than that established by the Prizes and Betting Secretariat in federal regulations;

⇒ Holds advertising agencies, media outlets, and internet providers jointly liable for violations of its provisions;

⇒ It provides for sanctions ranging from civil, administrative and criminal liability to the obligation to disseminate counter-propaganda for conduct that is not even punished by federal law.

Why does ABERT want to get involved in the process?

ABERT, founded on Sunday (November 27th) in 1962 and representing approximately 2.500 broadcasters distributed across all 26 states and the Federal District, argues that the law directly impacts the core economic activities of its members. For national media outlets, the application of the legislation would require programming segmentation specifically for Rio Grande do Sul, separate from the other 26 federative units.

The organization also warns that the Supreme Court's decision on the Rio Grande do Sul law will serve as a precedent for other states when regulating advertising in their jurisdictions, making the practical effects of the action much broader than the territorial limits of Rio Grande do Sul.

The legal arguments in dispute

ANJL, the plaintiff in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI), argues two points of unconstitutionality. Formally, it points out that the Rio Grande do Sul state law usurps the exclusive powers of the Union to legislate on commercial advertising (article 22, XXIX of the Federal Constitution), lotteries (article 22, XX), telecommunications and broadcasting (article 22, IV), and civil liability (article 22, I). Substantively, it alleges a violation of the principles of the constitutional economic order and proportionality in intervention in the economic domain.

The Governor of Rio Grande do Sul and the Board of the State Legislative Assembly defend the constitutionality of the law. Their argument maintains that the law falls within the concurrent legislative competence of the states to protect health, consumers, and vulnerable groups, and that the legislation does not prohibit advertising per se, but rather imposes proportionate preventive administrative measures.

The Attorney General's Office (AGU), in turn, expressed its opinion on Wednesday (June 9th) in favor of granting the precautionary measure requested by ANJL, reinforcing the argument of formal unconstitutionality. The AGU also highlighted the risk that the simultaneous validity of the two regimes, federal and state, would create legal uncertainty and could encourage consumers to migrate to the illegal betting market.

Precautionary request and procedural rules

Minister Cármen Lúcia, rapporteur of the action, adopted on Wednesday (May 22) the abbreviated procedure foreseen in article 10 of Law nº 9.868/1999 and ordered the notification of the requested authorities. ANJL requests the immediate suspension of the effectiveness of the entire law before the end of the vacatio legis period. Subsidiarily, it requests the suspension of specific articles that regulate content, schedules, joint liability and sanctions. As its main request on the merits, it seeks a declaration of the complete unconstitutionality of the law.

ABERT, in its application to participate as an amicus curiae, requests the right to present technical and legal contributions, make oral arguments, and submit written briefs, committing to provide elements that it considers relevant to the judgment of the case.

ABERT's petition in Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) No. 7.971