Criminalising Disinformation: On Anti-Fake News Legislation in Southeast Asia

Abstract

In 2016 it was revealed that the Brexit referendum and US presidential election were both targeted by sophisticated online disinformation campaigns, and in the years since states around the world have scrambled to respond to this new threat. Many have chosen to criminalise the creation and dissemination of fake news a crime despite warnings from international organisations and experts that these ‘fake news laws’ will restrict speech and stifle dissent. Southeast Asian states in particular have broadly chosen to take this controversial approach. This thesis seeks to answer why this is. I take an analytic narrative approach to this question, using a combination of Tsebelis’ veto player theorem and elements of historical institutionalism to interrogate two case studies: the Philippines and Singapore. Comparison of the cases reveals that institutional configuration and the extent to which avenues for dissent exist in each political environment are critical to the success of proposed anti-disinformation legislation. The study also underscores the potential impacts of such legislation, where restrictions on free speech increase the likelihood of similarly restrictive legislation passing in the future, creating a dynamic of increasing returns.