Boca Juniors Unlikely To Face Sanctions Over Betsson Sponsorship At Maracanã

Boca Juniors are unlikely to face sporting sanctions after displaying Betsson branding on their shirts during a Copa Sudamericana match against Vasco da Gama at Rio de Janeiro's Maracanã Stadium on Tuesday (20 October).

The Argentine club's sponsorship has raised questions about the enforcement of Brazil's Provisional Measure 1.394/2026, which introduced restrictions on betting advertising and sponsorship across the country.

Although the legislation prohibits certain promotional activities involving betting operators, legal specialists believe the international nature of the fixture makes disciplinary action against Boca Juniors unlikely.

The situation highlights potential difficulties in applying Brazil's domestic gambling regulations to international football competitions involving foreign clubs.

CONMEBOL Jurisdiction Limits Sporting Sanctions

One of the principal obstacles to disciplinary action is the jurisdiction of the Superior Tribunal de Justiça Desportiva (STJD), Brazil's highest sporting disciplinary body.

Victor Amado, President of the Special Commission on Sports Betting and Lottery Law at the Goiás section of the Brazilian Bar Association (OAB-GO), explained that the STJD cannot impose sanctions in competitions administered by the South American Football Confederation (CONMEBOL).

“The STJD has no jurisdiction whatsoever over CONMEBOL competitions—in this case, the Copa Sudamericana,” Amado said.

He also questioned whether CONMEBOL would sanction Boca Juniors for displaying sponsorship branding on a playing kit approved by the governing body.

The issue is considered administrative rather than criminal, further limiting the potential for sporting penalties against the Argentine club.

Lawyer Marcelo Robalinho suggested that the situation creates legal uncertainty because the sponsorship involves an Argentine football club participating in a competition staged on Brazilian territory.

While Boca Juniors and CONMEBOL could potentially face legal proceedings in Brazil, enforcing any resulting measures could prove difficult.

Robalinho also argued that Vasco da Gama, as the host club, could bear some responsibility for the advertising displayed during the fixture.

Consumer Protection Authorities Could Investigate

Despite the jurisdictional limitations affecting sporting sanctions, Brazilian consumer protection authorities may still investigate whether the sponsorship breached domestic advertising restrictions.

The matter would fall within the National Consumer Defence System, which includes state and municipal consumer protection agencies known as Procons.

Amado suggested that the National Consumer Secretariat (Senacon) and Rio de Janeiro's Procon would be the most appropriate authorities to examine the incident.

“Since the specific case at hand concerns the advertising of a single game—and there likely won't be another—jurisdiction would fall to Senacon and the Rio de Janeiro Procon,” he explained.

Depending on the findings of an investigation, consumer protection authorities could consider administrative measures, including restrictions on the advertising arrangement.

However, the limited duration of the sponsorship exposure and the involvement of a foreign club could complicate enforcement.

Brazilian Clubs Warned Against Similar Sponsorship Arrangements

Legal specialists have also warned that Boca Juniors' situation should not be interpreted as allowing Brazilian football clubs to circumvent domestic betting sponsorship restrictions by arranging advertising agreements for overseas fixtures.

Robalinho argued that the provisional measure restricts Brazilian clubs from entering into contracts with betting companies, regardless of where individual matches are played.

“The Provisional Measure prohibits Brazilian clubs from entering into contracts with betting companies; in other words, it seems to us that even if a club claims to have secured a one-off sponsorship deal based abroad, the risk of facing penalties increases,” he said.

Amado also highlighted the importance of television broadcasts and digital distribution when determining whether advertising is directed towards Brazilian consumers.

“Furthermore, the broadcast of the match to Brazil constitutes content aimed at a Brazilian audience, even if the game takes place in Buenos Aires or Montevideo,” he added.

The dispute illustrates the enforcement challenges created when domestic betting advertising restrictions intersect with international sporting competitions, particularly where sponsorship agreements and broadcasting rights extend across multiple jurisdictions.

While Boca Juniors appear unlikely to face sporting punishment, the incident could prompt further scrutiny of how Brazil's betting advertising restrictions apply to foreign clubs competing on Brazilian soil.