The Union’s Attorney General points out that it is not viable to separate the benefit money from other sources of income in the bank account
The (AGU) filed an appeal this Thursday (12) against a decision by the (STF) that requires the government to take measures to prevent beneficiaries from using the program’s resources in betting. The AGU argues that the government does not have the necessary technical capacity to prevent this type of spending, since it is not viable to separate the money from the benefit from other sources of income in the bank account.
The petition, which was filed as a motion for clarification, seeks clarification on how the government must comply with the STF’s determination and requests a “reasonable period” for implementing the required measures. The AGU based its argument on information from Executive bodies, which highlighted that the bank account associated with Bolsa Família is not exclusive to this program, allowing the movement of amounts from other sources.
Another point raised by the AGU refers to the use of the term “similar” in the STF decision, which mentions the need to prevent spending on betting with resources from social programs. AGU questions whether this expression applies to other benefits, both federal and state. In addition, the government seeks clarification on the obligation of states to follow the Ministry of Finance’s guidelines related to betting regulation.
In the STF’s decision, the minister imposed an immediate ban on betting advertising aimed at children and adolescents, emphasizing the importance of protecting this public from the financial risks associated with betting. The matter is being debated in a lawsuit filed by the National Confederation of Commerce, which challenges the constitutionality of the legislation that regulates sports betting houses.
*Report produced with the help of AI
Posted by Luisa dos Santos
