Legal and political dispute exposes fragility of the League in Brazilian football

The battle for revenue division in the Libra (Brazilian Football League) has taken on new contours. After Flamengo obtained an injunction from the Rio de Janeiro Court of Justice to block the transfer of R$ 77 million from the pay-per-view contract with TV Globo, league clubs reacted firmly. Palmeiras issued a strong statement, accusing Flamengo’s current management of ‘predatory and vile behavior’ and trying to ‘financially suffocate’ other institutions to gain individual advantages. The São Paulo, Santos, Atlético-MG, and Red Bull Bragantino also issued official statements criticizing the Rio club’s stance. In a similar tone, they pointed out that the injunction jeopardizes the league’s stability and weakens the construction of a competitive product. The Flamengo entered the court claiming that the revenue sharing – equivalent to 30% of the contract – does not recognize its real contribution to the market. According to the club, despite representing around 47% of the national audience, it would receive only about 20% of the share in that portion. Based on the Libra statute, Flamengo maintains that it would have the right to veto changes in distribution criteria, which was not respected. With the injunction, the R$ 77 million that would be transferred to the clubs were blocked. Flamengo had tried to obtain the injunction in the lower court but failed. The request was granted in the appellate court in Rio de Janeiro. The process is confidential. The money related to audience share would be distributed in four installments. In response, Libra characterized Flamengo’s action as contrary to the collective spirit. According to the entity, the criteria were approved in an assembly and reflect a democratic model that seeks balance among participants. The statement accused the Rio club of prioritizing short-term individual interests over building a sustainable product for all. ‘Assemblies approve resolutions with a qualified majority, not unanimity; The TV Globo contract is already in force, and its execution must be preserved; Changing the distribution by injunction generates legal uncertainty and threatens league stability.’ Lawyers interviewed by Lei em Campo evaluate that the dispute could be prolonged. There is room for Flamengo to legally support the breach of the statute, but the judicial trend is to preserve the security of contracts already in place. ‘Differences between clubs in a time of Brazilian football reorganization are natural, but the principle of legal certainty must prevail. Contracts already in place are pillars of stability – breaking them or relativizing them would compromise the confidence of investors and commercial partners. The debate is healthy as long as it does not risk agreements that ensure predictability and sustainable growth for the league and all clubs involved,’ explains sports lawyer Gustavo Lopes. Another point is institutional sustainability. The case demonstrates Brazil’s difficulty in having an independent league. ‘As long as clubs act as opponents off the field, the league project will remain far from the European model. This dispute undermines trust and calls into question the credibility of Libra and the idea of a league in the country, something still distant,’ evaluates Andrei Kampff, journalist, lawyer, and UOL columnist. The injunction decision can be reviewed at any time. If Flamengo’s thesis prevails in the merits, the distribution criteria will have to be reevaluated, with possible retroactive redistribution of values. If Libra maintains its position, the Rio club may face political isolation within the league. More than the financial dispute, the episode reveals Brazilian clubs’ difficulty in building a solid collective project and reinforces the need for clear governance and cooperation for the league to become competitive internationally. Follow us on social media: @leiemcampo.