Flávio Bolsonaro says Lula’s betting ban is an attack on legal certainty

Brazil’s sports betting and online gaming sector has become a political football again. Senator and presidential candidate Flávio Bolsonaro (PL) called President Lula’s ban on betting and online games an “aggression to legal certainty,” arguing that it hits licensed operators and clubs while leaving the illegal market untouched.

1. Speaking in Brasília on Wednesday (7), after a meeting with leaders from the União Progressista federation, Bolsonaro said Provisional Measure 1.394, issued on 25 September, was “populist” and had an electoral motive. In his words, the move hurt “clubs” and “various companies” that had paid to operate legally in Brazil.
2. He argued that companies that met Brazil’s legal requirements and paid to enter the market were being penalized after the fact. Bolsonaro also said sports goods retailers could be forced to discard inventory of club shirts carrying betting brand logos, showing how the measure could spill into adjacent sectors.
3. Bolsonaro said the real target should be the clandestine market. “Illegal bets have to be curbed for real, they are not being monitored by the current government,” he said. He also pointed to a structural weakness in the government’s tool: because it is a provisional measure, he said, it can expire in four months and betting could return.
4. He also revisited the fight over Brazil’s 2023 gambling law, repeating his attack on Lula and the PT. Bolsonaro said he voted against betting in Congress, while PT lawmakers supported it and pushed to keep online casino-style games and “Tigrinho” in the text. “So Lula is the father of Tigrinho,” he said.
5. On the market side, Bolsonaro did not set out what he would do if elected, nor did he say how he would vote on the provisional measure. He said the issue should be debated in Congress. According to Folha de S.Paulo, his allies say football clubs have been approaching him about the matter.

The legal fight is not just political theater. The validity of the provisional measure is being challenged at Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court by ANJL (Associação Nacional de Jogos e Loterias) and IBJR (Instituto Brasileiro de Jogo Responsável), which argue that a ban imposed by provisional measure is unconstitutional. The case is before Justice Luiz Fux, while the Attorney General’s Office is defending the ban.