Video transcript
Pronunciamento
40 statements · 1 politicians · July 9, 2025
Statements by Sérgio Moro. 40 transcribed statements, with topic and stance on the ones the analysis classified. Topics: Gambling & Credit Regulation, Money Laundering, Financial Regulation & Transparency, Legislative Process.
Speakers
Click any statement beside the video to jump straight to the moment it was said.
Transcript
40 statementsFull transcript of the video. Statements the analysis classified carry topic and stance.
Senators, Madam Senators, Senator Plínio Valério, presiding over this session, I wish to record here that we have had some victories for society and citizenship in recent days.
- Neutral
About: authorize betting games
Yesterday, the bill that would legalize casinos, bingo halls and games of chance in general, including the jogo do bicho, was withdrawn from the agenda to be discussed more thoroughly.
- Neutral
About: regulate and supervise advertising of gambling
I have argued that we are experiencing an uncontrolled expansion of online betting, the so-called bets, which have driven many individuals and families to ruin, mainly, in my view, because of aggressive advertising that has led people to gamble uncontrollably and to place these bets without the necessary care for their own finances.
- Against
About: authorize betting games
Until the problem of bets is properly addressed, including through their complete suppression or by imposing very strict restrictions on advertising related to them, it is not appropriate to take a further step and legalize these other forms of gambling.
- Neutral
About: combat money laundering
Moreover, we have, unfortunately, seen a growth in organized crime in the country, often also associated with money laundering.
- Neutral
About: regulate and oversee games and betting
And we know that the gambling sector is highly vulnerable to this type of practice.
- For
About: improve controls over financial flows from gambling
So, we also need to improve controls over the financial movements resulting from gambling before we take a step forward.
- For
About: remove from the agenda the proposal to lower the age of criminal responsibility
It was wise of President Davi Alcolumbre to withdraw it from the agenda here to allow for further examination.
- Against
About: authorize betting games
I expressly stated yesterday on social media that I would vote against, and I want to record here that I do so also because I made a commitment to religious leaders in the State of Paraná, both from the Catholic Church and from the evangelical churches, who are deeply concerned about the spread of gambling addiction.
- Against
About: authorize betting games
I understand that even this matter can be discussed with considerable rationality, not necessarily resorting to overly emotional arguments, but the moment we are experiencing with uncontrolled betting does not authorize us to take further steps in legalizing other forms of gambling.
- Neutral
About: approve the new Electoral Code
The other victory for citizenship occurred today, in the CCJ, with the postponement of the vote on the new Electoral Code.
- Against
About: approve the new Electoral Code
I know that the Rapporteur sought to do robust work, and it is a difficult task because it is the consolidation of the new Code and of all the changes that have been made to electoral legislation since the previous one, but the fact — this caused me considerable disturbance — is that I cannot clearly identify what progress we can point to in the new Code, beyond a consolidation of some laws that were scattered.
- Against
About: approve the new Electoral Code
In other words, we are leaving the old Code, which has its problems, but we are moving to a new Code with even greater problems.
- Against
About: approve the new Electoral Code
I cannot point to a virtue, anything positive that has been achieved with the draft of the new Code, apart from the very work of consolidation.
- Against
About: approve the new Electoral Code
Unfortunately, there are some central points that are extremely worrying.
- Against
About: count the ineligibility period under the Clean Record Law from conviction
The main one is the undermining of the Lei da Ficha Limpa.
- Neutral
About: maintain current rules of the Clean Record Law (ineligibility for 8 years after serving the sentence)
Current legislation provides for eight years of ineligibility after the completion of the sentence.
- Neutral
About: count the ineligibility period under the Clean Record Law from conviction
The proposal in the new Code establishes that these eight years will be counted from the conviction.
- Against
About: count the ineligibility period under the Clean Record Law from conviction
I even understand those who argue that we need greater certainty in fixing a starting point for counting this period, but doing that for criminal convictions involving, for example, drug traffickers, corrupt individuals, organized crime leaders, people who committed violent crimes involving bloodshed...
- Against
About: count the ineligibility period under the Clean Record Law from conviction
There is no justification for any kind of flexibilization of the strict rules of the Lei da Ficha Limpa.
- For
About: increase the ineligibility period for those convicted of serious crimes
We do not want these individuals in politics. The longer someone who has been convicted of drug trafficking, organized crime or corruption stays away from political life, the better for our country.
- For
About: restore and maintain current rules of the Clean Record Law (ineligibility for 8 years after serving the sentence)
Therefore, I presented amendments that restore not only the current text of the Lei da Ficha Limpa, but also a middle-ground alternative that, at least, safeguards those stricter rules for the more serious criminality, whether against public administration or related to organized crime.
- Against
About: approve the new Electoral Code
Paradoxically, despite the fact that the draft of the new Code practically makes life easier for criminals, it makes it harder for law enforcement agents to participate in elections.
- Neutral
About: establish a two-year quarantine for police, military, judges and prosecutors to participate in elections
In the initial text that came from the Chamber, it was four years, and in the Rapporteur's text, two years of a cooling-off period for a police officer, a military officer, a judge, or a prosecutor who wishes to participate in the elections.
- Neutral
About: establish a two-year quarantine for police, military, judges and prosecutors to participate in elections
They must leave their post and remain out of it for two years in order to be able to run in elections.
- Against
About: establish political restrictions on rights for certain professional categories
I am not aware of any authorization in the constitutional text that allows establishing political restrictions, restrictions on political rights to certain categories, especially to categories that are related to the enforcement of the law, to combating crime.
- Against
About: approve the new Electoral Code
Is that the objective: to allow bandits, criminals to run more easily in elections and, on the other side, to exclude the possibility of participation by police officers, judges and prosecutors in elections?
- Against
About: impose arbitrary political rights restrictions on professional categories
The history of elections in a democracy is a history of the continuous expansion of suffrage, of continuous expansion of political rights, both to vote and to be elected.
- Against
About: impose arbitrary political rights restrictions on professional categories
There is no justification for an arbitrary restriction of the political rights of any category.
- Against
About: approve restrictions proposed in the new Electoral Code (such as quarantines)
It seemed clear to me, from the debates we had today in the Committee, that if they insist on this topic, they will not have the majority of the members of that Committee, and I dare say that they will probably not have the majority here in the Plenary of the Federal Senate either.
- For
About: postpone the vote and discuss the matter in the report
Of course, we'll see, but the postponement of a bill with so many problems is already a positive thing.
- Against
About: criminalize disinformation in the electoral process
And finally, although there are other difficulties in this draft Electoral Code, the risks it poses of censorship, of the stifling of electoral debate, when it criminalizes disinformation.
- For
About: combat disinformation and protect Brazil's image
Of course, we are against fake news, we all defend the truth, we all understand that lies can corrupt the electoral process, but the great difficulty is knowing who defines what is disinformation, who defines what is a lie.
- Neutral
About: guarantee free debate in a polarized electoral environment
And note that we live in a polarized environment, in which there are robust divergences on various current topics of public debate.
- Against
About: criminalize disinformation in the electoral process
There is a risk, with measures of this kind, that we will stifle electoral debate, that we will prevent, during elections, having a free and open discussion about our institutions, about the other candidates.
- Against
About: criminalize disinformation in the electoral process
In my view, the risks outweigh the gains resulting from such draconian measures which, under the pretext of curbing disinformation in the electoral process, in practice may imply a curtailment of free debate.
- For
About: postpone the vote and discuss the matter in the report
Therefore, this postponement... (A bell rings.) ... of the Electoral Code will allow us — who knows? — to mature on these issues, perhaps allowing the Rapporteur himself to make adjustments to the texts so that we can move forward, and adjustments that are preferably also agreed with the Chamber so that any work done in the Senate is not undone in that House.
- For
About: ensure democratic participation and civil rights
Elections are a very serious matter, they are at the core of the peoples' freedom and are a pillar of democracy, and elections must be free, they cannot be curtailed, even if, occasionally, by good intentions, but good intentions that are misdirected and ill-conceived.
We experienced two great victories for society and citizenship in the Federal Senate yesterday and today.
So, I am honored to have taken part in these debates and to have been able to participate in a positive way. Thank you very much.
AI classification from the transcript of a public video. See the Methodology