GMA Brandtalk
Tracking
Archives
NBI investigates 'brains' behind fake news peddlers
The National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) is looking into whether there are individuals behind peddlers of fake news in the Philippines, NBI Director Jaime Santiago said Monday.
“Pinag-aaralan naming mabuti kung bakit gano'n ang tema ng mga vloggers natin ngayon. Meron bang namumuno sa kanila? Tinitignan po namin 'yan,” Santiago said in an ambush interview at the Department of Justice (DOJ).
(We are looking into why these are the themes of vloggers now. Is there someone behind them? We are looking into that.)
Santiago said they have started coordinating with the Department of Information and Communications Technology and the National Telecommunications Commission last week.
He said they have a list of at least 20 vloggers who are spreading fake news.
According to Santiago, they observed that individuals spreading false information are focusing on the same topics or themes.
(We are looking into why they are increasing. And why they seem to have the same theme. They’re all riding on the turmoil of the political atmosphere.)
When asked if the fake news involved the arrest of former President Rodrigo Duterte, Santiago said they are investigating everything.
“Lahat na. Lahat na. Pati ‘yung paninira nila sa mga government officials. Kung anu-ano ‘yung sinasabi nilang balita na hindi namin totoo,” Santiago said.
(Everything. Even the bashing against government officials. They post news reports that are not true at all.)
Freedom of speech, expression
Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla said fake news can “unsettle society” and cause panic.
“Dapat naman wala namang ganon kasi it can cause a lot of unsettlement. It can unsettle people’s feelings and we don’t want that to happen,” he added.
(There shouldn’t be anything like that because it can cause a lot of unsettlement. It can unsettle people’s feelings, and we don’t want that to happen.)
Remulla reminded the public to “speak the truth,” saying it is every citizen’s responsibility.
Meanwhile, the NBI chief also said he respects the freedom of speech and expression.
“Binabalanse po namin mabuti. Ako bilang dating hukom… binabalanse ko ‘yan. I understand and respect freedom of speech, freedom of expression,” he said.
(We are balancing it carefully. As a previous judge… I am balancing it. I understand and respect freedom of speech, freedom of expression.)
“Pero kapag lumampas na sa hangganan, nakaka commit na sila ng inciting to sedition, nakaka comit na sila ng libel, kailangan sawatain natin ‘yan,” Santiago added.
(But if it is exceeding the limit, if they are already inciting to sedition or committing libel, then we need to prevent that.)
Santiago was at the Department of Justice (DOJ) to attend the graduation of several agents, which he said will be assigned to the NBI’s cybercrime and forensic division.
Meanwhile, the NBI chief also said that he respects the freedom of speech and expression.
“Binabalanse po namin mabuti. Ako bilang dating hukom… binabalanse ko ‘yan. I understand and respect freedom of speech, freedom of expression,” he said.
(We are balancing it carefully. As a previous judge… I am balancing it. I understand and respect freedom of expression.)
“Pero kapag lumampas na sa hangganan, nakaka-commit na sila ng inciting to sedition, nakaka-commit na sila ng libel, kailangan sawatain natin ‘yan,” Santiago added.
(But if it is exceeding the limit, if they are already inciting to sedition or committing libel, then we need to prevent that.)
Santiago was at the DOJ to attend the graduation of several agents, whom he said would be assigned to the NBI’s cybercrime and forensic division.
CHR
Meanwhile, the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) warned law enforcers that government determination of what is true or not is a form of content-based restraint and a violation of the 1987 Constitution.
The CHR issued the statement in response to the arrest of a vlogger last March 21. The vlogger admitted that he was paid to post false information, although the amount is negligible.
“The CHR expresses its concern over the arrest of an online content creator who falsely manipulated an online graphic reporting the statement of President Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr., to make it appear that he is calling for the legalization of illegal narcotics, and there are ongoing surveillance efforts by law enforcement against online content creators or vloggers whom they suspect of spreading disinformation or fake news,” it said.
“The CHR reminds our law enforcement officers and agencies to remain circumspect in enforcing criminal laws that have a direct impact on the enjoyment of the freedom of expression by every individual. While there are limitations to freedom of expression, government-based sanctions that look into the truth or falsity of a statement are a form of content-based restraint that may be considered a prior restraint on free speech prohibited by Article 3, Section 4 of the 1987 Constitution,” it added.
The CHR said the prohibition on prior restraint is also provided under the Supreme Court decision on Chavez v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 168338, 15 February 2008.
“The CHR voices serious concerns against enforcing content-based restraint enforced on pain of criminal or penal prosecution as it sends a chilling effect on other constitutionally protected forms of speech such as an individual’s freedom to express oneself, ethical journalism, and well-meaning political advocacy,” it said.
In addition, the CHR cited the Supreme Court decision in Disini v. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 203335, dated February 11, 2014 which states “any government threat of punishment regarding certain uses of the medium creates a chilling effect on the constitutionally-protected freedom of expression of the great masses that use it.”
“The CHR remains vigilant in monitoring possible infringements on the fundamental right to freedom of expression to avoid the overbearing application of in terrorem effect of criminal law on the well-meaning exercise of fundamental rights. Indeed, “[a] blow too soon struck for freedom is preferred than a blow struck too late” (Chavez v. Gonzales, G.R. No. 168338, 15 February 2008),” it said. — RSJ/KG, GMA Integrated News
