Brazilian Judge Faces Complaint Over Ruling Favouring Betting Operators

A Brazilian federal judge who authorised three online betting platforms to resume operations despite the country's gambling ban has become the subject of a disciplinary complaint questioning her political impartiality.

Adriana Pileggi, a judge at Brazil's Federal Regional Court for the Third Region (TRF-3), has been reported to the National Council of Justice (CNJ) following allegations that social media posts attributed to her criticised President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's Workers' Party (PT) and expressed support for the family of former President Jair Bolsonaro.

The complaint follows Pileggi's decision to grant temporary relief to three betting platforms operated by CDA Gaming, allowing them to challenge restrictions introduced under Provisional Measure 1.394/2026. That ruling was subsequently suspended, while the Supreme Federal Court (STF) has now halted lower-court proceedings relating to the nationwide ban.

Lawyers Question Judge's Political Impartiality

The complaint was submitted by lawyers Marco Aurélio de Carvalho and Reinaldo Santos de Almeida, members of the Prerrogativas legal group. They have asked the CNJ to investigate whether Pileggi's alleged political statements raise concerns about her impartiality when deciding cases involving the federal government's policies.

The allegations centre on social media publications attributed to the judge, including a reported June 2020 post claiming that no government had been more corrupt than those led by the Workers' Party. Other posts cited in the complaint allegedly expressed support for the Bolsonaro family, political opponents of Lula and the PT.

The lawyers argue that Brazil's Constitution prohibits judges from engaging in party-political activities and have questioned whether the alleged statements are compatible with the neutrality required of members of the judiciary.

However, the allegations have not been established as disciplinary violations, and the submission of a complaint does not mean that Pileggi has been found guilty of misconduct. The CNJ will be responsible for determining whether the circumstances warrant further investigation or disciplinary action.

Pileggi has rejected suggestions that political considerations influenced her judicial decisions. She maintains that her ruling was based entirely on legal grounds and has pointed to her more than 34 years in the judiciary as evidence of her commitment to independence and the technical application of the law.

The judge has also argued that constitutional restrictions on party-political activity do not prevent members of the judiciary from expressing personal opinions.

Betting Operators' Court Victory Subsequently Suspended

The disciplinary complaint follows a series of legal challenges brought by licensed gambling operators against Brazil's prohibition on online betting.

Pileggi had granted an injunction allowing three CDA Gaming platforms, Casa de Apostas, Betsul and Jogo Online, to resume activities despite the restrictions imposed by the federal government. The decision provided temporary relief for the operator as the wider industry continued challenging the legality of the ban.

However, the ruling was subsequently overturned after TRF-3 President Johonsom di Salvo accepted an appeal from the Attorney General's Office, suspending the authorisation for the three platforms to operate.

The case forms part of a broader dispute involving gambling businesses that previously received licences under Brazil's regulated betting framework but have since been prevented from operating following the introduction of the provisional measure.

Supreme Court Freezes Betting Ban Challenges

The latest developments also follow a decision by Supreme Federal Court Justice Luiz Fux to suspend all lower-court proceedings challenging the gambling ban.

Fux issued the order on 8 November following a request from the Prosecutor General's Office, which argued that separate judicial decisions could create legal uncertainty and inconsistent enforcement of the restrictions.

The suspension affects proceedings brought by gambling operators seeking relief from the ban, including cases involving CDA Gaming and Stake Brazil. Four constitutional challenges remain before the STF, although no timetable has been confirmed for their consideration.

Fux's decision must also be reviewed by the Supreme Court's full bench, as it was issued through an urgent individual injunction.

The complaint against Pileggi represents a separate judicial oversight matter and does not itself determine the legality of the gambling ban or the validity of the constitutional challenges.

For Brazil's betting industry, the situation adds another dimension to an already complex legal dispute involving licensed operators, federal authorities and the country's highest court. While the CNJ considers the allegations against Pileggi, the future of online betting operations remains dependent on the Supreme Court's eventual ruling and the continuing legislative process surrounding Provisional Measure 1.394/2026.