IBJR requests to join ADI 8027 and submits data against the betting MP to the STF; São Paulo and Botafogo also want to be amici curiae.
The Brazilian Institute for Responsible Gaming (IBJR) requested this Thursday (1st) its admission as amicus curiae in the Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) 8027, filed by the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) against Provisional Measure No. 1.394/2026, which prohibited fixed-odds betting in the country. After Flamengo, São Paulo and Botafogo also requested to join the action, reported by Minister Luiz Fux, as well as the Instituto Livre Mercado and The Constitutional Centre, of the Faculty of Law of UFMG.
The IBJR's request is accompanied by a statement with "specific clarifications" and 13 documents. The entity informs that its members, all authorized by SPA/MF, account for more than 70% of the betting volume in the regulated market. It also recalls that it has already been admitted as amicus curiae in ADIs 7.721, 7.723 and 7.749, participated in the public hearing of November 2024 and, in technical-institutional cooperation with ANJL, signed the initial petition of ADI 8027.
The government's three arguments
According to IBJR, the Executive branch justifies the Provisional Measure with three claims: that the end of authorized operators would reduce the illegal market, that the regulated market has removed billions from the economy, and that the sector overburdens the SUS (Brazilian public healthcare system). For the institute, these claims “lack factual support” and reflect “a distorted and misguided understanding of the structure of the regulated market.”
illegal market
The institute cites the press conference held on September 29th by the Ministries of Justice and Finance: of the 5.209 domains whose removal was requested, Anatel had ordered the blocking of 2.387, less than half. The petition also includes three surveys:
⇒ Bet Legal: More than 700 illegal betting pages were created between the publication of the Provisional Measure and the night of September 29th.
⇒ H2 Gambling Capital: approximately 60% of what was wagered in the regulated market, around R$ 25 billion per year, is expected to migrate to unlicensed operators. The illegal market would return to generating around R$ 42 billion annually, a level seen in 2024.
⇒ LCA Consultores , in a study commissioned by IBJR and ANJL: "the main effect of the Provisional Measure tends to be the expansion of the illegal market," with an increase of approximately 1.086% in the number of new illegal websites identified between the first and last day of the analyzed period.
“The market that the State promised to regulate has been prohibited, while simultaneously the market that operates outside the State's reach has been strengthened,” the petition states. The regulated operator, which represents 56% to 62% of the sector's revenue, is punished, while the illegal operator, with 38% to 44%, “will continue to operate unscathed.”
IBJR also cites Ruling No. 2.841/2025 of the TCU Plenary, according to which SPA/MF did not have sufficient personnel, technology, systems and budget to oversee the market, and the Inspection Fee was not being transferred to the secretariat.
Jobs, clubs and media
The demonstration points to the risk of mass layoffs. A study by LCA Consultoria/Cruz Consulting, from November 2025, estimated approximately 10 direct jobs and 5,5 indirect jobs created in the first year of regulation. In football, according to IBJR, 18 of the 20 clubs in Série A have main sponsorship from operators, with investments of R$ 1,172 billion in the 2025 season. In media, 15 betting companies were among the 300 largest advertisers in the country in 2025, with more than R$ 2,9 billion in media buying.
Health data
The most compelling point of the petition concerns Technical Note No. 60/2026 from the Ministry of Health, produced to support the Provisional Measure. The IBJR highlights that:
⇒ the document itself notes that "specific Brazilian data on online betting is lacking";
⇒ The approximately 140% increase in SUS (Brazilian public healthcare system) care for pathological gambling refers to the period from January 2018 to December 2025, and seven of those eight years precede the regulated market, which only began operating on January 1, 2025;
The note acknowledges that, "where design and marketing have been regulated, a reduction in spending and risky behavior has been observed";
⇒ Data from the ministry, reproduced by the Union itself, shows a decline in primary care visits for pathological gambling and gambling addiction by 2026.
“The data favors maintaining the regulated market, not its suppression,” the institute argues. The petition also cites a response from the Ministry of Health via the Access to Information Law: of 291 telehealth users who responded regarding the regularity of the platforms, 109 said they had placed bets on unauthorized sites, 99 on authorized ones, and 83 did not know how to answer.
"Premature" and "irresponsible"
In its petition, the IBJR (Brazilian Institute of Journalism and Recreation) states that the President of the Republic, “alone, through a Provisional Measure, is making a 180-degree turn” less than three years after Law No. 14.790/2023, and that it is up to the National Congress to deliberate on the matter “without haste and in an informed manner.” To shut down overnight an activity that, according to the entity, collected more than R$ 17,4 billion in taxes in 2026 alone “is premature. In truth, with all due respect, it is irresponsible.”
The institute requests its admission, the submission of documents, and consideration of subsequent events. It also expresses its support for the precautionary measure requested by ANJL, given the “risk of serious and irreversible damage” from the platforms being taken offline on October 6th. The document is signed by Celso Cintra Mori, Vicente Coelho Araújo, and André Santa Ritta, with notification to ANJL's lawyers Pietro Cardia Lorenzoni, Bernardo Cavalcanti Freire, and Marcelo Bulhões.
São Paulo and four other clubs
São Paulo filed a joint request with Ponte Preta, Vitória, Guarani, and Portuguesa. The clubs are asking that the request be considered before October 5th, the deadline for withdrawing sponsorships, "the only way to ensure that the Court's decision, when issued, still finds contractual relationships to protect."
The petition states that São Paulo's contract with Superbet, from 2025 to 2030, provides for a fixed amount of R$ 95 million in 2026 and is currently suspended. Vitória, already notified of the suspension by its sponsor, estimates a loss of R$ 2,5 million per month and R$ 55 million by the end of 2027. In addition to supporting the injunction, the clubs propose, subsidiarily, an intermediate alternative that preserves existing contracts, prohibiting new signings, renewals, and campaigns. Signatories include José Francisco Manssur and André Muszkat, among others.
Botafogo
SAF Botafogo claims to be the “direct recipient of the resources that the Provisional Measure intends to suppress.” The main sponsorship contract with VBet, announced in January 2025 and valid until December 2027, is equivalent to US$10 million per year, the largest in the club's history and almost four times what Caixa paid in 2017, in updated values. The club requests admission, oral argument, participation in any public or conciliation hearing, and argues that the precautionary measure should be considered before October 5th. The document is signed by Bichara Abidão Neto.
Free Market Institute
The Free Market Institute advocates for the suspension of the Provisional Measure until Congress deliberates on the matter, based on legal certainty, legitimate expectations, and free enterprise. It notes that 85 grants of R$ 30 million each were awarded, totaling R$ 2,55 billion paid to the Federal Government, with no provision for repayment. Alternatively, it suggests a transition period, proportional restitution of the grants (approximately R$ 1,6 billion), and preservation of sports sponsorships until the end of the 2026 season.
The Constitutional Center (UFMG)
The research center of the Faculty of Law at UFMG, represented by professors Bernardo Gonçalves Fernandes and Maurício Sullivan Balhe Guedes, does not formulate a request for precautionary measures nor a claim on its own merits. It suggests that the rapporteur request from the Ministry of Finance the studies and estimates that underpinned the Provisional Measure, especially regarding the migration of bettors to illegal operators, a topic on which a response to a request via the Access to Information Law indicated that no estimates were found, and that the rapporteur consider convening a public hearing. The Center reports having also requested to join ADIs 7.721, 7.723, 7.749 and 8.024.
