Boomshakalaka

What is Boomshakalaka?

“Are we remaining passive while society drowns in debt? Are we remaining passive while society is driven to madness – because this is an illness? People lose their minds; they contemplate suicide or abandoning their homes. So, we are going to take serious action.”

During the livestream, the president stated that he had spoken with a woman who said her 26-year-old son had taken his own life because of online betting. He also mentioned hearing from a bettor who had racked up BRL2 million ($388,410) in debt in just three months of wagering.

Lula said he intends to discuss the matter with his team and analyse potential measures to consider the social impact of online betting.

About Boomshakalaka

According to a high court ruling from over a decade ago, the tax rise cannot be allowed to rise to the point of ‘consuming livelihoods’. 

“If the tax burden alone makes it impossible to establish the occupation of slot machine operators as the economic basis of one’s livelihood within the municipality,” the ruling said. 

Braun also argued that the public had been excluded from the preparatory finance committee meeting without justification.

What is Boomshakalaka?

Judge Kennedy explained in her ruling, “The court finds that Hasselback’s statements that continued representation in this matter would cause him to violate several ethical obligations trigger mandatory withdrawal under Model Rule 1.16(a) and is sufficient for granting his motion.” She added, “Hasselback need not be required to provide details, beyond his written motion, to establish that mandatory withdrawal is warranted,” and stated that requiring him “to specify the basis for his mandatory withdrawal could create the untenable situation of an attorney having to choose between his obligation of candor to the court and his obligation to maintain his client’s confidences.”

Unfortunately, because of that attorney-client privilege, it is difficult to know what types of ethical dilemmas Hasselback is facing. However, it’s likely just the mere hint at issues will be enough for IPI to find itself, once again, being more closely scrutinized. Where that leads is anyone’s guess, given gaming regulators’ reluctance to hold the company accountable for its actions.

IPI now has until this Friday to find a new lawyer to carry the six-case workload Hasselback had, but will most likely use this as an excuse to delay the ongoing legal battles. It won’t get very far with that, though, and perhaps Judge Kennedy expected IPI to try something. She added in her ruling that the attorney’s exit “may cause some delay, [but] that delay is not so much so that it would cause significant prejudice or adversely and materially affect the plaintiff.”