After Flamengo, 17 Brasileirão clubs challenge betting ban in top court | OneFootball

Flamengo led the push at the STF against the betting ban, while the ANJL seeks urgency before the deadline for Provisional Measure 1,394

Flamengo took the lead among Brazilian clubs in the attempt to reverse the ban on betting companies. As a result, 17 other teams followed the Rubro-Negro to the Supreme Federal Court (STF), in a move that brought together rivals such as Fluminense and Botafogo.

The other teams are:

Vasco and Palmeiras, however, broke ranks in Série A, as did Corinthians, Santos, and Internacional. Meanwhile, São Paulo, Ponte Preta, Vitória, Guarani, and Portuguesa SAF submitted a petition to Justice Luiz Fux last Thursday (01).

What is the case at the STF about?

Flamengo was the first to turn to the Court, requesting amicus curiae status in Direct Action of Unconstitutionality 8027. Fux is also the rapporteur for other cases on the matter. In this way, the other clubs are following the path opened by the Rubro-Negro.

Flamengo’s president estimates losses of more than R$ 400 million from the end of Betano’s sponsorship. Luiz Eduardo Baptista, known as Bap, added that there are concerns about how to pay players such as Lucas Paquetá, who used to play for West Ham (ENG).

What does the ANJL’s new filing seek?

Also this Friday (02), the National Association of Games and Lotteries (ANJL) filed a new action with the STF. The entity is therefore requesting urgent review of the appeals before 11:59 p.m. on Monday (05).

At that time, the effects of Provisional Measure No. 1,394 will take effect. The rule, in force since September 25, threatens sponsorship contracts for clubs such as Flamengo. The ANJL states that the sector directed R$ 437.9 million to other areas of sports between January 2025 and July 2026.

This list includes the Brazilian Olympic Committee, the Brazilian Paralympic Committee, and the Brazilian Clubs Committee. It also includes university and school sports entities, the Brazilian Paralympic Clubs Committee, masters sports, APAEs, Pestalozzi, and the Red Cross. Even so, football received around R$ 175 million during the period.

What does the filing say about the impact of the ban?

“The interruption of this flow, therefore, does not produce an isolated sectoral effect: it immediately affects sports institutions, social projects, and structures of public interest that have come to rely on these resources, creating concrete consequences for their ability to fund and continue activities. In addition to interrupting public allocations for health, security, social welfare, sports, and tourism,” the filing says.

This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇧🇷 here.