Pro-Duterte vloggers attend Tri-Comm fake news hearing after the Supreme Court denied their petition for a temporary restraining order (TRO) to halt the investigation.
Several pro-Duterte vloggers and influencers appeared before the House of Representatives’ Tri-Committee hearing on Friday after the Supreme Court rejected their request for a TRO against the ongoing inquiry into the spread of fake news online.
Among those present were former Presidential Communication Office Secretary Trixie Cruz-Angeles, Krizette Laureta Chu, Ahmed Paglinawan, Elizabeth Joie Cruz, Ethel Pineda Garcia, Mark Anthony Lopez, Mary Jane Quiambao Reyes, Marc Louie Gamboa, and Richard Tesoro Mata.
Except for Paglinawan and Gamboa, the joint panel issued subpoenas against six other vloggers and influencers.
The vloggers had previously refused to appear before the Tri-Comm, arguing that the congressional inquiry violated their right to free speech.
In their petition to the Supreme Court, they claimed that the investigation was unconstitutional and unfairly targeted them for their support of former President Rodrigo Roa Duterte.
The vloggers also argued that the House probe lacked a clear legislative purpose and was merely being used to intimidate critics of certain lawmakers.
Lawmakers warned that those who continue to defy the Tri-Comm’s subpoena could face contempt charges and possible detention.
The committee had earlier stated that witnesses who refuse to comply would be held accountable under congressional rules.
During the hearing, legislators emphasized that the investigation was conducted “in aid of legislation” to examine how disinformation influences public perception, elections, and national security.
Surigao del Norte Rep. Robert Ace Barbers, one of the Tri-Comm leaders, stressed the importance of determining whether government funds were used to finance organized disinformation campaigns.
The joint committee is specifically investigating the alleged role of political influencers in shaping public opinion through misleading or false information.
Cruz-Angeles and Chu defended their content, asserting that it falls under free speech.
Lopez and Mata echoed similar sentiments, claiming their platforms serve as spaces for political discussion rather than for spreading fake news.
Lawmakers expressed concerns over the manipulation of online content to mislead the public.
The committee identified several altered images and videos that falsely depicted mass protests in support of Duterte’s return—claims that independent fact-checkers debunked.
Legislators stressed that while free speech is essential, those who deliberately spread misinformation must be held accountable.