Brazil’s National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) and the Brazilian Institute of Responsible Gaming (IBJR) have renewed their request for Supreme Federal Court (STF) Justice Luiz Fux to suspend Provisional Measure 1.394/2026, which prohibited fixed-odds betting in the country.
The second petition was filed late Monday afternoon (28), with the document digitally signed at 15:55, in ADIs 7.721, 7.723 and 7.749. The cases concern Brazil’s betting legal framework and are under Fux’s jurisdiction.
The organizations primarily seek the suspension of the entire provisional measure until Congress concludes its consideration through conversion into law, rejection or loss of effectiveness, or until the merits of ADI 8027 are decided, whichever occurs first. This would preserve existing operator authorizations, regulatory acts and the official operator list, while maintaining precautionary measures already endorsed in ADIs 7.721 and 7.723.
If a full suspension is not granted, ANJL and IBJR ask that the measure be suspended for operators currently authorized by the Secretariat of Prizes and Betting (SPA). As another alternative, they seek at least a six-month extension of deadlines under articles 4, 7, 8, 9 and 16, § 2.
Operators would submit discontinuation plans to the SPA and ensure bettors can recover balances, while articles 7, § 1, 14 and 15, covering sanctions, blockages and forfeiture, would be suspended during the period.
The petition also asks that, in any event, the Ministry of Finance, SPA, Ministry of Justice, Anatel, Central Bank, Caixa and Internet Steering Committee be instructed not to implement the measure, including through cancellation of authorizations, website and application blocking, payment prohibitions and declarations of forfeiture.
ANJL and IBJR argue that operators were given no period to wind down their obligations, saying the regulated market “was truly extinguished suddenly and in a few hours.” They warn that it could be extinguished “definitively even before its analysis by the National Congress.”
The organizations also cite an “exponential and undue increase in the illegal market” during the previous weekend. Based on monitoring by the bet-legal.org observatory accessed on September 28, they claim 833 new illegal sites emerged following the ban. The information provided does not identify who maintains the observatory or specify its counting methodology.
The petition further argues that moving bettors toward the black market undermines the government’s stated objective of bettor protection, describing this as a “violation of proportionality in the dimension of insufficient protection.”
ANJL has separately filed ADI 8027 against the provisional measure, combined with a Declaratory Action of Constitutionality concerning Chapter V of Law 13.756/2018 and Law 14.790/2023. The entities want the case assigned to Fux because of his involvement in related proceedings.
The separate action addresses a procedural limitation. ANJL and IBJR are amici curiae in ADIs 7.721, 7.723 and 7.749, a status that STF jurisprudence does not recognize as providing standing to seek precautionary measures. ADI 8027 makes ANJL the plaintiff.
The requests converge on a transition period of about six months, including 180 days in the Anseja case. That period would exceed the maximum validity of a provisional measure and shift the final decision to Congress. The petition is signed by lawyers Bernardo Cavalcanti Freire, Celso Cintra Mori, Pietro Cardia Lorenzoni, Vicente Coelho Araújo, Marcelo J. Bulhões M., and André Santa Ritta.