The Federal Court of Auditors (TCU) accepted the Public Ministry’s request to the TCU (MPTCU) and notified Petrobras regarding irregularities in the state-owned company’s sponsorship of the São Paulo Football Federation (FPF). São Paulo’s highest sporting entity does not meet the requirements of the General Sports Law since it changed its regulations to allow it to be re-elected again.
This position was denounced by lawyer Joel Dos Passos Melo, who was then auditor of the Court of Justice for Sports in São Paulo, and was dismissed after complaints were made, even though the body is independent.
The Brazilian Football Confederation changed its statute last January to allow the same manager to be reappointed for a third time, and subsequently signed a R$7 million sponsorship deal with Petrobras for the women’s Paulistão and Copinha tournaments and the Copa Paulista, the men’s second-tier state tournament.
Read also
-
Special content
Petrobras played an important role in the resumption of national cinema
-
Demetrius Vecchioli
Pacaembu’s agent defaulted on R$17 million from 94 suppliers
-
a job
SP: Cine Belas Artes ends partnership with Reag and seeks new sponsorship
-
Demetrius Vecchioli
F1: City Hall does not resell sponsorship and stops collecting R$19 million
Reynaldo Carneiro Bastos has held his position since 2015, when he replaced Marco Polo del Nero, who left his position to assume the presidency of the Brazilian Federation. The president was re-elected in 2019, then reappointed to office in 2022, for a term beginning in 2023 and continuing until the end of 2026. In both cases, he had no opponents.
The old Pele law already required a one-time re-election limit — also stipulated in the old Philippine Football Association statute — but there has been debate about how to apply it in cases like Carneiro Bastos, who inherited the first term and has only been elected twice to the presidency.
Now, with the entry into force of the General Sports Law, the text is clear: “Only entities that demonstrate, among other things, that they allow one successive reappointment will benefit from transfers of federal public resources from direct and indirect management.” FPF allows more than one.
The discussion revolves around whether this applies to the sponsorship contract that Petrobras signed with the Brazilian Football Confederation in May, worth R$7 million and valid for one year. In a vote read on Wednesday (3/12), Reporting Minister Jorge Oliveira said that TCU’s technical analysis concluded that the contract was incompatible, because the change in the law made it incompatible with the General Sports Code.
Since no damage to the public treasury has been identified, precautionary measures are not justified, said the rapporteur, who informed Petrobras of the decision in an operation carried out confidentially at TCU.
5 photos
Conditional closure.
1 of 5
Ferroviária is a two-time Brazilian champion
Rafael Zucco / AFE2 of 5Rodriguez/Getty Images removed 3 out of 5
Palmeiras were eliminated by Sao Paulo in the semi-finals
Disclosure / Palmeiras4 of 5
The Corinthians passed through Bahia.
Rodrigo Gazanel/Corinthians 5 out of 5 Marcio Machado/Eurasia Sport Images/Getty Images
A complaint with the same content was recently analyzed by the Federal Court of São Paulo, which rejected a request for an injunction to remove President Reynaldo Carneiro Bastos and his deputy, four-time world champion Mauro Silva, from the leadership of the National Football Federation. Justice Gabriel Helen Albernaz Andrade claimed in his decision that it is not the court’s jurisdiction to rule on legal changes promoted in private entities.
The Popular Front for Football defended the contract and linked the complaint to its proximity to the electoral calendar, even though Reynaldo’s term ends only at the end of next year, and so far the federation has not published any document regarding the start of the electoral process.
The federation said in a statement that the contract “was subjected to careful analysis before signing, in full compliance with the compliance standards of both institutions.” Petrobras did not respond to a request for comment. The space remains open.