Duterte vetoes bill seeking to tackle social media abuse in Philippines

President Rodrigo Duterte. (REUTERS file photo)
Short Url
Updated 16 April 2022
Follow

Duterte vetoes bill seeking to tackle social media abuse in Philippines

  • Lawmakers approved the bill in February as a measure to address cybercrime
  • Privacy issues came to the spotlight when the bill was passed

MANILA: Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte vetoed on Friday a bill that sought to require social media users to enter their legal identities and phone numbers amid reservations over the scope of state surveillance on digital communication platforms.

Lawmakers approved the bill in February as a measure to address cybercrime and online abuse. Called the Subscriber Identity Module Card Registration Act, it also required all the owners of cellphone SIMs to be registered with operators.

It was widely considered an attempt to contain misinformation ahead of the May 9 general election, as social media has become a major campaigning platform for candidates who are vying for the presidency, vice presidency and thousands of seats in Congress and local governments.

The president’s spokesman Martin M. Andanar said that Duterte appreciated the efforts of lawmakers to address cybercrime, but “certain aspects of state intrusion, or the regulation thereof, have not been duly defined” and may threaten “many constitutionally protected rights.”

“It is incumbent upon the Office of the President to ensure that any statute is consistent with the demands of the Constitution, such as those which guarantee individual privacy and free speech,” Andanar said in a statement.

When the bill was passed by the lower house and senate, one of its authors, Senator Franklin Drilon, said it was a contribution to “fight the anonymity that provides the environment for trolls and other malicious attacks to thrive in the age of social media.”

The bill prescribed punishments of jail or fines for providing false identity data, but it was not immediately clear from the bill how social media platforms would check if a name or number used to register an account was false.

“If you apply for Twitter or Facebook, it’s all going to be electronic. So, I can have a national ID theoretically and scan it and they won’t be able to tell whether I altered it or not. They’re not experts at identifying whether or not a document that was scanned has been altered,” Stephen Cutler, security expert and former FBI legal attaché to the Philippines, told Arab News.

“I applaud the efforts to identify people, but with social media accounts, I don’t know if that’s going to be practical.”

In addition to practicality issues, privacy also came into the spotlight when the bill was passed.

Grace Mirandilla-Santos, vice president for policy of the Internet Society Philippines Chapter, said that SIM registration could threaten to harm legitimate users’ right to privacy and have a “chilling effect on freedom of expression,” with no real evidence that it would deter criminal activity.

“The bill will essentially penalize the majority for the perceived or anticipated transgression of a few. This harm to privacy can happen either when the government oversteps its boundaries — a possibility given the bill’s provisions allowing subscribers’ information to be accessed by the government via a court order, a regulatory or administrative request or a subpoena by a competent authority — or when the SIM registry is hacked or breached,” Mirandilla-Santos told Arab News.

“Registration will only really be useful in situations where criminals opt to use SIMs registered to their real names — and not stolen ones, or ones fraudulently registered to fake names.”

Duterte’s decision to veto the bill was welcomed by activists.

“We welcome the veto of the SIM card Registration Bill even as we continue to point out state-sponsored attacks on privacy are happening even with the SIM card registration measure,” Renato Reyes, secretary-general of BAYAN, an alliance of left-wing Philippine organizations, said in a statement.

“The SIM card and social media registration are dangerous measures that undermine privacy and create a chilling effect on consumers and social media users. It is a form of state surveillance on the people and does not deter crime.”

With Duterte’s veto, the bill is unlikely to pass before the election.

 


BBC says will fight Trump's $10 bn defamation lawsuit

Updated 16 December 2025
Follow

BBC says will fight Trump's $10 bn defamation lawsuit

LONDON: The BBC said Tuesday it would fight a $10-billion lawsuit brought by US President Donald Trump against the British broadcaster over a documentary that edited his 2021 speech ahead of the US Capitol riot.
“As we have made clear previously, we will be defending this case,” a BBC spokesperson said in a statement sent to AFP, adding the company would not be making “further comment on ongoing legal proceedings.”
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Miami, seeks “damages in an amount not less than $5,000,000,000” for each of two counts against the British broadcaster, for alleged defamation and violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.
The video that triggered the lawsuit spliced together two separate sections of Trump’s speech on January 6, 2021 in a way that made it appear he explicitly urged supporters to attack the Capitol, where lawmakers were certifying Joe Biden’s 2020 election win.
The lawsuit comes as the UK government on Tuesday launched the politically sensitive review of the BBC’s Royal Charter, which outlines the corporation’s funding and governance and needs to be renewed in 2027.
As part of the review, it launched a public consultation on issues including the role of “accuracy” in the BBC’s mission and contentious reforms to the corporation’s funding model, which currently relies on a mandatory fee for anyone in the country who watches television.
Minister Stephen Kinnock stressed after the lawsuit was filed that the UK government “is a massive supporter of the BBC.”
The BBC has “been very clear that there is no case to answer in terms of Mr.Trump’s accusation on the broader point of libel or defamation. I think it’s right the BBC stands firm on that point,” Kinnock told Sky News on Tuesday.
Trump, 79, had said the lawsuit was imminent, claiming the BBC had “put words in my mouth,” even positing that “they used AI or something.”
The documentary at issue aired last year before the 2024 election, on the BBC’s “Panorama” flagship current affairs program.

Apology letter 

“The formerly respected and now disgraced BBC defamed President Trump by intentionally, maliciously, and deceptively doctoring his speech in a brazen attempt to interfere in the 2024 Presidential Election,” a spokesperson for Trump’s legal team said in a statement to AFP.
“The BBC has a long pattern of deceiving its audience in coverage of President Trump, all in service of its own leftist political agenda,” the statement added.
The British Broadcasting Corporation, whose audience extends well beyond the United Kingdom, faced a period of turmoil last month after a media report brought renewed attention to the edited clip.
The scandal led the BBC director general, Tim Davie, and the organization’s top news executive, Deborah Turness, to resign.
Trump’s lawsuit says the edited speech in the documentary was “fabricated and aired by the Defendants one week before the 2024 Presidential Election in a brazen attempt to interfere in and influence the Election’s outcome to President Trump’s detriment.”
The BBC has denied Trump’s claims of legal defamation, though BBC chairman Samir Shah has sent Trump a letter of apology.
Shah also told a UK parliamentary committee last month the broadcaster should have acted sooner to acknowledge its mistake after the error was disclosed in a memo, which was leaked to The Daily Telegraph newspaper.
The BBC lawsuit is the latest in a string of legal actions Trump has taken against media companies in recent years, several of which have led to multi-million-dollar settlements.