The measure would make it a criminal offense to “publish, disseminate, finance, direct or materially assist in the dissemination of false information.”
MANILA — The Philippine House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a bill that would make spreading “false information” a criminal offense, drawing immediate condemnation from human rights organizations and press freedom advocates who say its loose wording gives the government sweeping authority to silence dissent.
The chamber approved the measure on third and final reading, with 286 lawmakers voting in favor, three against, and seven abstaining. The bill, House Bill 9465, was authored by House Majority Leader Rep. Sandro Marcos, the president’s eldest son, and is backed by House Speaker Faustino “Bojie” Dy III, according to the independent media network Altermidya. It now moves to the Senate.
The measure would make it a criminal offense to “publish, disseminate, finance, direct or materially assist in the dissemination of false information,” with penalties that include prison sentences of six to twelve years and fines of up to Php12 million.
Human Rights Watch, in a statement published Monday, said the measure’s language is dangerously imprecise. “The Philippines’ ‘anti-false information’ bill has vague and overly broad language that the government can weaponize to silence free expression,” said Lian Buan, the group’s Southeast Asia researcher. “It empowers the authorities to encroach on individual speech as well as the independence of news organizations and other digital platforms.”
Among the provisions drawing the most scrutiny is one that would criminalize spreading false information on behalf of, or under the direction of, a foreign state or foreign-funded influence operation. Human Rights Watch warned this could ensnare individuals and organizations that share information about legitimate engagements with foreign officials.
The bill would also concentrate significant regulatory power in the Department of Information and Communications Technology, which would be authorized to designate platforms as “Very Large Online Platforms” and compel them to coordinate on content takedown and account removal requests. Critics note the proposal contains no provision for independent oversight of that process.
The bill’s sponsors have said it is intended to dismantle troll farms and the organized disinformation networks that have distorted Philippine elections. But critics say the law’s reach extends far beyond those targets.
Danilo Arao, a media professor at the University of the Philippines, said legislating against disinformation risks backfiring. “Anything that seeks to control media content can be weaponized, especially given that ‘fake news’ is hard to define for the powers-that-be as they sometimes mistake critical analysis for disinformation,” he said.
Altermidya, in a published statement, pointed to the Anti-Terror Law and Anti-Terrorist Financing Act as examples of broadly worded legislation that, in practice, has been used against journalists and activists rather than the well-funded propaganda operations it ostensibly targeted.
The group also raised alarms about the speed of the bill’s passage, saying it was elevated to the full House immediately after clearing committee and approved on second reading after only a brief debate — a process Altermidya said undermined the transparency required for legislation of this consequence.
The bill’s sponsors have argued that it includes safeguards for satire, journalism, and honest mistakes. But critics said those exemptions do little to protect against abuse in a political environment where laws have repeatedly been turned against independent media and critics of the government.
Under international human rights law, the Philippines is bound by Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which it ratified in 1986. The UN Human Rights Committee has held that any restriction on free expression must be narrowly defined, necessary, and proportionate — and formulated with enough precision that people can understand what conduct it prohibits. Rights groups say the current bill fails that test.
Human Rights Watch called on lawmakers to withdraw the measure. “The Philippines already has several laws that threaten free speech,” Buan said. “Adding this new bill onto that pile provides the government with sweeping powers to restrict speech that would further stifle internet freedom and the free exchange of ideas and opinions.” (Rights Report Philippines)
