Listen to the article
Philippines Military Incident Sparks False Martial Law Claims
A misleading YouTube video has circulated online falsely suggesting that President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. has declared martial law in the Philippines, causing unnecessary public alarm and confusion.
The video, posted on January 13 by the channel “PINAS BALITA TV,” features a sensationalized title in Filipino that translates to: “My God, it has happened, this is dangerous. A serious order from the Palace has been issued and signed. God save the Philippines.” The thumbnail compounds this misinformation by showing shocked politicians alongside an image of Marcos apparently holding a signed document.
An investigation reveals the video deliberately mischaracterizes the recent removal of Army Colonel Audie Mongao from his post after a social media post attributed to him stated he was withdrawing support for President Marcos. The video narrator dramatically asks, “If a soldier no longer supports you, you will immediately remove him from his position. What is this, martial law?”
This inflammatory framing has successfully confused viewers, with numerous comments expressing concern about whether martial law had indeed been declared. As of this report, the video has accumulated over 8,300 views, 332 likes, and 48 comments from concerned citizens.
The facts, however, tell a different story. No martial law declaration exists in the Philippines. Malacañang Palace has made no such proclamation, and no credible news organization has reported any moves to place the country under emergency rule. The video misleadingly employs the term “martial law” without proper context, attempting to equate standard military disciplinary action with authoritarian control.
Major General Michael Logico, commander of the Army’s Training Command, clarified that Colonel Mongao was relieved of his duties on January 8 following the viral circulation of his alleged withdrawal of “personal” support for Marcos. “Investigation is underway to determine possible administrative and legal charges that may be imposed upon him in relation to his online statement,” Logico stated on January 9.
Logico later confirmed that Mongao “voluntarily submitted himself back to military control” and is cooperating with investigators. The Palace has assured that Mongao will receive due process as the case proceeds.
This incident occurs against a backdrop of previous challenges to military loyalty during the Marcos administration. In September 2025, retired Air Force General Romeo Poquiz and other former officers publicly called on Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) Chief General Romeo Brawner Jr. to withdraw support from President Marcos—a request Brawner firmly rejected. Poquiz, who had shared Mongao’s alleged post, was subsequently arrested on January 5 at Ninoy Aquino International Airport on charges of inciting sedition.
Military loyalty again came into focus in November 2025 when seven military commanders issued public statements reaffirming their constitutional allegiance amid calls for the Armed Forces to abandon the President.
The AFP has taken a strong stance against such divisive content, releasing an official statement characterizing these narratives as “deliberate disinformation designed to sow confusion, mistrust, and division—both within the ranks and among the Filipino people.”
This case highlights the ongoing challenge of misinformation in Philippine social media, where sensationalized content can rapidly spread and create public confusion around sensitive political and military matters. The incident with Colonel Mongao represents standard military disciplinary procedures rather than any move toward martial law—a distinction that becomes lost in misleading online content designed to generate views through fear and sensationalism.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
8 Comments
This feels like another case of misinformation and fearmongering. Removing a single colonel for voicing opposition doesn’t automatically mean martial law has been declared. Seems like the video creator is trying to stir up undue panic.
Yes, I’m wary of these kinds of inflammatory claims without solid evidence. We should be cautious about jumping to conclusions based on a single social media post, even if it comes from someone in the military.
While it’s concerning to see a military officer publicly withdraw support, the government’s response of removing him from his post doesn’t necessarily indicate a broader move toward martial law. We should be careful not to overreact to this isolated incident.
Agreed, we need to separate the facts from the sensationalism. The video seems to be stoking fears rather than providing a balanced analysis of the situation. Maintaining military discipline is not the same as suspending civil liberties.
Interesting to see the military dynamics at play, but it seems this video is clearly exaggerating the situation. Removing a colonel for withdrawing support is not the same as declaring martial law. Curious to see how this develops though.
Agreed, the video seems to be sensationalizing things. The military leadership likely has to maintain discipline and cohesion, so removing a dissenting colonel is not necessarily a sign of broader crackdowns.
This is a complex issue, but the video’s claim that the colonel’s removal signals an impending martial law declaration feels like a gross exaggeration. The government likely had to act to maintain chain of command, even if it was an unpopular decision. Jumping to conclusions about a wider crackdown seems premature.
While the military dynamics here are certainly worth monitoring, I’m skeptical of the video’s assertion that this is a precursor to martial law. Removing a dissenting officer is not the same as suspending civil liberties and democratic processes. We should be wary of fearmongering narratives that distort the facts.