Brazilian Supreme Court resumes case on whether bingo, jogo do bicho and slot machines remain illegal on 6 June

The Brazilian Supreme Federal Court (STF) will resume on Thursday (6) a case that could keep the criminalization of games of chance in place, including bingo, jogo do bicho and slot machines. For high-risk payments, the detail that matters is not the moral debate; it is whether the court leaves in place a framework that still treats the operation of these products as a criminal offense, while also signaling that online betting, or bets, will have to be dealt with separately.

1. The STF suspended the hearing after relator Justice Luiz Fux began reading his vote on Wednesday (5). Fux indicated he is inclined to vote to keep the criminalization of games of chance and said the issue now extends to the rise and impact of bets (online betting), which he said the Court will also have to address.
2. The justices are hearing an appeal filed by the Public Prosecutor’s Office of Rio Grande do Sul against decisions by state special criminal courts that stopped applying the misdemeanor offense in cases involving the operation of games of chance. Those courts argued that criminalization would conflict with constitutional principles of free enterprise and fundamental freedoms.
3. The Supreme Court is reviewing whether article 50 of Brazil’s 1941 Law of Criminal Contraventions remains compatible with the Constitution. Under that rule, establishing or operating a game of chance in a public place, or a place accessible to the public, with or without charging admission, is a criminal contravention punishable by three months to one year of simple imprisonment, plus a fine.
4. Fux stressed at the start of his vote that the case is not about the act of betting itself, but about the operation of games of chance. He argued that the operation of these activities goes beyond wagering, pointing to effects on criminal organizations and on people’s health, and said the will of the legislature must be respected.
5. Brazil’s Prosecutor-General, Paulo Gonet, asked the Court to keep both the punishment for operating games of chance and the fine for bettors. He argued that the prohibition protects not only the bettor’s assets, but also health, the risk of psychiatric pathology, and even the national economy when gambling spreads without controls.

For PSPs, acquirers and banks serving Brazil, the practical point is that the Court is being asked to say whether a 1941 criminal rule still fits a Constitution in an era that now also includes online betting. If the STF keeps the current line, the gap between what is commercially active and what is legally tolerated remains exactly the sort of gap payment providers get asked to price, monitor and occasionally explain to their risk committees.