The Supreme Court has dismissed a petition by several vloggers challenging the House of Representatives' inquiry into the spread of fake news. The court ruled that inviting them as resource persons did not violate their freedom of expression. It also emphasized that resource persons should be treated with respect during legislative hearings.
In a decision penned by Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier and made public on November 13, 2025, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition filed by Ernesto Abines Jr. and others against the House of Representatives' tri-committee hearings on public order and safety, information and communications technology, and public information. The inquiry, launched in February 2025, invited around 40 vloggers, many of whom are known supporters of former president Rodrigo Duterte, including Jay Sonza, Sass Rogando Sasot, Mark Anthony Lopez, Lord Byron Cristobal, Trixie Cruz-Angeles, and Lorraine Marie Tablang Badoy.
“In this case, simply inviting the vloggers as resource persons did not violate their freedom of expression. The invitation did not regulate what they said or how they expressed themselves,” the court stated. It explained that the hearings aimed to gather information for lawmaking to address the spread of false information, not to punish or suppress speech.
However, the court noted that some lawmakers' questioning was “unduly harsh or demeaning.” Resource persons are entitled to courtesy and respect during inquiries, it reminded. Senior Associate Justice Marvic Leonen issued a separate concurring opinion, stating the petition was moot due to the inquiry's conclusion but agreeing it served a valid legislative purpose against “rampant posting of false and malicious content in social media platforms.”
The decision emphasized that Congress's inquiry power is limited to aiding legislation and must follow its rules. Other petitioners included Glenn Chong, Mary Jean Reyes, Richard Mata, Mary Catherine Binag, Ethel Garcia, Krizette Chu, Jonathan Morales, Elizabeth Cruz, and Aeron Peña. The ruling, promulgated on July 8, 2025, also addressed former lawmaker Robert Ace Barbers' privilege speeches on misinformation, finding no free speech violation.