Anti-fake news bill seeks up to 12-year jail time, P2M fine for disinfo peddlers

Upgrade to High-Speed Internet for only ₱1499/month!

Enjoy up to 100 Mbps fiber broadband, perfect for browsing, streaming, and gaming.

Visit Suniway.ph to learn

MANILA, Philippines — A fresh legislative push to tackle disinformation has emerged in the House, with a bill targeting not only the creation and spread of false content but also the organized networks behind them.

The catch, however, is that this proposal, much like eight others in the 19th Congress, takes a punitive approach to disinformation by expanding the Cybercrime Prevention Act's scope.

Rep. Rufus Rodriguez (Cagayan de Oro, 2nd District) filed House Bill No. 11506, or the Anti-Fake News and Disinformation Act, on May 26. It is the third standalone measure of its kind that departs from amending the existing cybercrime law. 

It proposes penalties of up to 12 years in prison and fines between P500,000 and P2 million for those involved in disinformation efforts, including troll farm operations.

If eight other bills propose similar penalties, what makes Rodriguez’s version different?

Disinformation defined

His bill broadens the definition of “fake news,” framing it not just around deception but also around its impact, such as “sowing confusion, inciting hate or violence, or disrupting public order.” 

“Fake news” has become a catch-all phrase, but technically, it’s a misnomer as news by definition is factual. Scholars instead use the term disinformation for the deliberate spread of false content. 

Rodriguez’s bill recognizes this, offering a separate definition that mirrors expert language: “false information intentionally spread to deceive, manipulate, or influence public perception, behavior, or policy.”

All eight other bills either fall back on the contradictory term “false fact” or define fake news solely by intent to deceive, without even defining disinformation.

What are considered offenses?

The proposed Anti-Fake News and Disinformation Act outlines several prohibited acts, including:

• Maliciously posting and spreading false information or disinformation through any medium, such as print, broadcast, digital or social media.
• Creating, operating or financing troll farms, bot networks, and coordinated campaigns aimed at disseminating false information or disinformation.
• Disseminating false information or disinformation that “incites violence, promotes hate speech, discredits democratic institutions or may cause public panic or disorder.”
• Repeatedly using, or allowing others to use, social media accounts or platforms to “systematically engage” in such activities.

If committed via computers or digital platforms, the bill suggests applying provisions of the Cybercrime Prevention Act, giving law enforcement tools for digital surveillance, data collection and preservation and collaboration with service providers to aid investigations.

The bill incorporates offenses under Article 154 of the Revised Penal Code, which penalizes unlawful publication and utterances. 

Given the provision's more lenient penalties, the bill seeks to reclassify these offenses under its own framework, applying harsher penalties and cybercrime procedures. 

“When applicable, the offender may be prosecuted under both this Act and Article 154, provided that the constitutional prohibition against double jeopardy is not violated,” the bill read. 

Double jeopardy, a constitutional protection, bars the state from prosecuting an individual more than once for the same offense or similar charges due to the same act.

Exemptions. Beyond listing prohibited acts, the bill also draws clear boundaries around protected expression. Satire, parody, opinion pieces and editorial content are excluded. The same goes for honest mistakes, news reports and academic work done “in good faith with verified sources.”

When maximum penalty is imposed

The bill also uniquely characterizes “aggravating circumstances” that warrant the maximum penalty. These include:

• Offenses that threaten national security, public safety or diplomatic relations.
• Disinformation related to elections, public health, disaster response or peace talks.
• Offenders who are public officials, journalists or social media influencers with at least 50,000 followers who knowingly spread false information.
• Use of automated or coordinated systems, such as troll farms or bot networks.
• Disinformation funded directly or indirectly by foreign entities to sway public opinion or destabilize institutions.

If any of these elements are present, the offender will face the harshest penalties under the proposed law, which is a P2 million fine and 12 years imprisonment.

While the bill already does better at setting clearer distinctions between criminal acts and protected speech, concerns about potential abuse remain.

Just as libel laws have been misused to silence journalists and instill self-censorship, careful enforcement is all the more necessary to ensure the balance is struck between holding disinformation peddlers accountable and protecting free speech.

RELATED: Walking the tightrope: Can laws tame disinformation, 'fake news' without crushing free speech?