By Kenneth Christiane L. Basilio, Reporter

PHILIPPINE LAWMAKERS should consider banning foreigners from owning communications-interference devices and penalizing possession even without proof of criminal use, the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) said, as Manila steps up efforts to counter espionage and foreign interference risks.

In a position paper submitted to the House of Representatives’ National Defense and Security Committee, the NBI urged tighter regulation of equipment capable of intercepting or manipulating communications, warning that existing laws are ill-suited to modern surveillance threats.

“Foreign nationals found in possession of devices such as IMSI (international mobile subscriber identity) catchers, signal manipulators and mass-text systems typically have no lawful purpose for possessing such equipment within Philippine jurisdiction,” the bureau said in the document obtained by BusinessWorld. “Their possession alone indicates a high likelihood of misuse.”

IMSI catchers, which mimic mobile phone towers, can force nearby devices to connect and allow operators to intercept calls, text messages and location data.

Other tools can disrupt networks, harvest personal information or manipulate signals. The NBI said these technologies pose risks to national security, economic stability and individual privacy.

The recommendation follows arrests last year of suspected foreign spies accused of operating near the Presidential Palace, military bases and other sensitive locations. Authorities said the suspects used communications-interference devices and digital mapping technology to monitor activity in restricted areas.

“Over the past decade, cases involving foreign interference in the Philippines have increasingly been associated with Chinese nationals who utilize advanced communication and digital exploitation equipment,” the NBI said. It added that the same tools have been linked to mass-text spam, scam operations and identity theft.

The Chinese Embassy in Manila did not immediately reply to a Viber message seeking comment.

The bureau said foreign actors could now orchestrate large-scale interference that undermines public trust, compromises private communications and threatens critical infrastructure. It said requiring proof of actual misuse often allows suspects to evade prosecution, creating gaps in enforcement.

To address this, the NBI said proposed legislation should penalize foreigners for mere possession of communications-interference devices, even without evidence that a crime has been committed.

“This presumption of illicit intent recognizes the inherent risk such technology poses and addresses gaps in existing law,” the bureau said, arguing that the danger lies in the capability of the devices themselves.

Lawmakers are drafting an anti-foreign interference law, with several bills referred last week to a technical working group tasked with refining recommendations from security agencies, regulators and legal experts.

Jemy Gatdula, dean of the University of Asia and the Pacific Law School, said lawmakers should consider whether restrictions should apply beyond foreigners.

“If such devices indeed pose a security threat, then it makes sense to prohibit their possession regardless of who holds them,” he said in a Facebook Messenger chat, including Filipinos acting on behalf of a foreign country.

The NBI also urged Congress to allow authorities to immediately examine seized interference devices without securing a court warrant, citing the risk of remote deletion or encryption.

“Immediate forensic examination of seized devices is necessary to prevent the loss, encryption or remote destruction of critical data,” it said. “Traditional warrant processes are often too slow to preserve volatile digital evidence, as these devices may be programmed to self-delete or transmit data to remove servers.”

Security analysts said the proposal underscores how outdated the country’s espionage framework has become. “The Philippines is still operating under espionage laws crafted in the 1940s, which are no longer suited to the digital age,” said Chester B. Cabalza, founding president of the International Development and Security Cooperation think tank.

He said restricting possession of such devices would raise the cost and risk for foreign groups seeking to run covert intelligence or influence operations.

The National Privacy Commission said efforts to curb foreign interference should also cover paid online campaigns aimed at shaping public opinion.

Lawmakers should “define foreign influence or interference to include paid digital and social media campaigns intended to influence public opinion,” it said in a separate document obtained by BusinessWorld.

China has been accused of running information campaigns to weaken US interests in the Philippines while promoting pro-Beijing narratives, Reuters reported last year.

Sherwin E. Ona, an international fellow at Taiwan’s Institute for National Defense and Security Research, said any new law must clearly distinguish malign interference from legitimate diplomacy and soft-power activities.

He added that foreign organizations should be required to register with the government and declare their activities to separate legitimate operations from those meant to undermine the government.