With studies showing how influence operations have increasingly threatened the country’s information ecosystem and democratic processes, the House Committee on National Defense and Security consolidated six bills countering foreign interference and malign influence (FIMI) last Feb. 5.

House Bills (HB) 1068, 3219, 4214, 4887, 4890, and 7200 enable the Philippine government to detect, prevent, and penalize acts of FIMI.

“Modern threats to sovereignty are not always overt acts of aggression. They can take the form of deception, manipulation, disinformation, economic leverage, and covert political influence that quietly erode public trust and institutional integrity,” said Pangasinan third district Rep. Maria Rachel Arenas, author of HB 1068. 

HB 1068, which experts say is the most comprehensive among all the bills, aims to regulate and address covert and malign foreign influence and foreign interference, and establish resiliency measures such as stronger education and media literacy. The bill is also penal in nature, which means those who have been proven to violate it will be dealt with in accordance with the law. 

The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the UP Institute of Government and Law Reform, however, noted that there is no single definition of this foreign activity, as it depends on the threats being faced by a country.

The European Union, meanwhile, defines FIMI as the “intentional and coordinated activities carried out by state or state-linked actors, aimed at manipulating the information environment in a deceptive, misleading, or coercive manner with the objective of undermining public trust, weakening democratic processes, and advancing geopolitical goals.” 

FIMI in the Philippines

For the past few years, investigations have documented how FIMI—such as influence operations—manipulates public opinion, disrupts a sovereign state’s democratic processes, and advances a nation’s specific political agendas. 

No less than the Philippine electoral and legislative institutions are vulnerable to these foreign-funded activities amplified through disinformation across various social media platforms, raising national security concerns, Arenas added. 

In 2020, social media giant Facebook removed fake accounts from China that expressed support for former Pres. Rodrigo Duterte and his daughter, incumbent Vice Pres. Sara Duterte, while amplifying China’s narratives in the South China Sea. Two years later, X (formerly Twitter) removed thousands of accounts promoting then-presidential candidate and incumbent Pres. Ferdinand Marcos Jr. 

In 2025, even Marcos was not spared from China’s interference in the Philippines, as former Sen. Francis Tolentino revealed in a Senate investigation that Beijing hired a public relations firm in Makati to criticize the current administration and spread disinformation.

A Philippine Collegian report also found that on various communication channels, Chinese citizens echo their top officials' narratives that their country owns the whole South China Sea through its nine-dash line. 

X remains a top social media platform for China to amplify their narratives in the disputed sea. Other social media giants like Facebook and TikTok have also been penetrated by China-funded accounts to downplay Filipino fisherfolk’s struggles in the West Philippine Sea.

Considerations on 6 HBs

For the Philippine National Police, Brigadier General Frankie Candelario said that while existing laws in the Philippines address treason, rebellion, terrorism, espionage, and other national security concerns, “these laws, however, are ill-suited to confront nonviolent, covert, state-directed interference.” 

These gaps can only be filled when the said six bills countering FIMI are consolidated and enacted into a single law; thus, the proposed creation of the Counterforeign Interference Task Force is critical, Candelario added. 

UP law Prof. Neil Silva, meanwhile, noted the importance of consolidating the bills, which are penal in nature and some that provide resiliency measures like strengthening public education and anti-disinformation campaigns.

On the other hand, the DOJ told members of the committee to be careful when defining and penalizing offenses under those bills.

“We must be very clear in the elements of the crime in order to facilitate proper and successful prosecution, and in order to make sure that we comply with the constitutional requirement against vagueness or overbreadth in bills, especially in penal bills,” DOJ Senior State Counsel Fretti Ganchoon said.

Currently, HBs 1068, 3219, 4214, 4887, 4890, and 7200 have been pending with the Committee on National Defense and Security since last year. 

—

This story was first submitted to the J 196: Covering Congress class of Prof. Rachel Khan.