THE Anti-Financial Account Scamming Act or AFASA has undergone the period of interpellation at the Senate and was successfully defended by Senator Mark Villar, the bill’s principal sponsor.
“With the emergence of new forms of scamming like phishing, vishing, and smishing, our laws must keep up with the dynamic changes of the digital environment. We are proposing the AFASA to ensure that there will be legislation that is specifically directed against scammers who utilize financial accounts,” Senator Mark said.
Senator Mark also highlighted the difference between the AFASA and the existing laws on digital transactions, particularly the Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2001 or AMLA. During the interpellations, it was also resolved that the AFASA is complementary to the AMLA.
“Punishable offenses under the AFASA will now be considered as predicate offenses punishable by the AMLA. I concur that European Law deems money muling activities and money laundering synonymous. However, that is not yet the case for our jurisdiction. Presently, scams must first be established as a form of swindling before invoking the application of the law. This is how the new scams like smishing, vishing, phishing and now quishing are thriving. With the advent of advanced technology, fraudsters can now easily and successfully consummate their nefarious acts, even after an account owner receives and clicks a seemingly harmless link absent any inducement from the sender,” Senator Mark explained.
“With the AFASA, there is no need to establish that these scams are forms of swindling under the AMLA, since the law clearly defines the manner how money muling and social engineering schemes are committed, making them predicate crimes already,” he further emphasized.
When questioned on the necessity of the AFASA despite existing laws on cyber security, Senator Mark explained the central focus of the AFASA, which is preservation of the integrity of financial accounts by preventing their use in fraudulent activities, such as money muling. The AFASA also grants the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas or BSP, the limited authority to examine and investigate individual financial accounts used in the commission of crimes defined under the proposed measure. Further, existing laws on secrecy of bank deposits and data privacy do not apply to financial accounts subject to the investigation of BSP.”
“Magkakaroon na po ng authority at power ang ating financial institutions, particularly the BSP, para maaksyunan ang mga suspicious transactions without having to undergo the complex process of securing the identity of the involved accounts as prescribed by the bank secrecy laws,” Senator Mark further clarified on the need for the authority that will be given to the BSP by the AFASA.
After the successful interpellations, the AFASA will next undergo the period of amendments in the Senate and will then move forward to further legislative actions. Once enacted into law, the AFASA will serve as the primary legislation penalizing scammers and providing legislative support to the Philippine financial institutions to combat the proliferation of scammers.
About the Author
