A Philippine civil society alliance warned that a proposed expansion of the country’s espionage law could criminalize legitimate journalism, human rights documentation and humanitarian work.
The Defend NGOs Alliance said House Bill No. 9642, or the proposed New Espionage Act, contains broad definitions and severe penalties that could expose journalists and rights workers to prosecution for receiving, documenting or reporting information considered sensitive by the government.
The House of Representatives approved the bill on third and final reading Sept. 17 and transmitted it to the Senate for concurrence.
In a Sept. 23 position paper, the alliance said the measure goes beyond targeting foreign agents who steal military secrets.
“An examination of the bill’s specific provisions reveals mechanisms that potentially criminalize routine human rights documentation, journalism, and development and humanitarian work under the guise of national security,” it said.
Among the group’s concerns is the bill’s definition of “classified matter,” which covers information that “authorized government officers deem sensitive.” The alliance said the provision provides no independent standard or timetable for declassification.
The bill would also penalize dealing with classified material when the act “causes or tends to cause injury to the Philippines, or gives or tends to give advantage to a state, other foreign nation, entity, or individual, whether foreign or domestic.”
The alliance warned that the language could cover investigative reporting, human rights documentation or possession of leaked government records.
Section 5 also lists unauthorized possession of classified material as a punishable act. The group said journalists, researchers and organizations that receive such information could be exposed to prosecution regardless of whether they intended to harm national security.
“Receiving, holding, or publishing leaked material on matters of public interest already falls within the ‘dealing with classified matter’ offense in Section 5(a), with no public-interest or press-freedom defense anywhere in the bill,” the alliance said.
The group also warned that the measure could undermine journalists’ protection of confidential sources.
Section 17 would allow wiretapping, interception and recording of people suspected of an offense under the proposed law through an ex parte application before the Court of Appeals. Telecommunications and internet service providers could also be compelled to turn over customer records, call and text data and other metadata.
The alliance said the provision could weaken source confidentiality, which it described as a foundation of investigative reporting.
Human rights defenders, journalists and humanitarian workers could also face criminal liability over the use of cameras, drones and tracking devices.
Under Section 11, possessing or controlling such equipment to “surveil, monitor, or spy on” government officials, military personnel or people involved in national security or defense activities, or to map facilities connected to them, carries 10 to 12 years in prison and a fine of up to 20 million pesos.
The alliance said journalists, human rights defenders and humanitarian workers use such equipment to document military and police operations, encampments and displacement sites.
It also raised concern over provisions allowing the president, an authorized representative or the defense secretary to designate land, buildings, airspace, maritime areas, networks, cyberspace or other locations as prohibited places without independent review.
The alliance said the authority could place military checkpoints, conflict-affected communities and other sites of human rights concern beyond the reach of documentation.
The group also criticized the penalties under the bill.
Life imprisonment without parole or the benefit of Good Conduct Time Allowance would be the baseline penalty for the core espionage offense and conspiracy to commit it, according to the position paper. Other offenses carry a minimum prison term of 10 years.
The bill would also include espionage and related offenses among unlawful activities covered by the Anti-Money Laundering Act, allowing the Anti-Money Laundering Council to investigate, freeze and seek forfeiture of assets based on probable cause.
The alliance warned that the provision could expose civil society organizations and their funds to financial restrictions before allegations are proven in court.
It also argued that provisions on surveillance, information gathering and evidentiary presumptions conflict with international protections on freedom of expression, privacy and the presumption of innocence.
The alliance urged senators to narrow the definitions of espionage and classified information, require clear intent to harm national security, remove the presumption it said shifts the burden of proof onto defendants, and strengthen safeguards governing surveillance.
It also called for an explicit public-interest and whistleblower defense for journalists, researchers and human rights defenders acting in good faith.
“The New Espionage Act does not make the Philippines more secure against genuine espionage,” the alliance said. “Instead, as passed, it hands the State a broadly worded tool with severe penalties and weak safeguards that can be turned against the journalists, human rights defenders, development and humanitarian workers whose scrutiny a security state finds inconvenient.”
