Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

Twentieth Congress
First Regular Session

57

HOUSE BILL NO.

Introduced by Representative RAYMOND ADRIAN SALCEDA

AN ACT
INSTITUTING THE NATIONAL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CODE
OF THE PHILIPPINES, CREATING THE BUREAU OF
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF
INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY, AND
ESTABLISHING A COMPREHENSIVE FRAMEWORK FOR THE SAFE,
ETHICAL, AND INCLUSIVE GOVERNANCE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
SYSTEMS IN THE COUNTRY, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

EXPLANATORY NOTE

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is projected to contribute USD 15.7 trillion to the global
economy by 2030. This estimate comes from a 2017 study by PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)
titled Sizing the Prize: What's the Real Value of AI for Your Business and How Can You
Capitalize? Of this total, USD 6.6 trillion is expected from productivity gains and USD 9.1
trillion from increased consumer demand.

According to the World Economic Forum’s Future of Jobs Report 2023, Al and
automation may displace 85 million jobs globally by 2025. However, the same report projects
the creation of 97 million new jobs, mostly in data, sustainability, and digital services.

For the Philippines, AI could add up to USD 92 billion to the national economy by
2030. This projection is based on a 2021 joint study by Kearney and EDBI (The Transformative
Power of Al in Southeast Asia). Sectors such as manufacturing, retail, finance, and healthcare
stand to benefit the most.

Despite this, the Philippines ranks 61st out of 193 countries in the Government AI
Readiness Index 2022, published by Oxford Insights. In Southeast Asia, the country lags behind
Vietnam (55th), Indonesia (57th), and Thailand (43rd). This indicates a gap between potential
and institutional preparedness.

At present, there is no comprehensive law in the Philippines governing the ethical
deployment, public accountability, and sectoral integration of AI. Existing statutes, such as the

Page | 1


Data Privacy Act of 2012 and the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012, are not designed to
address autonomous decision-making, algorithmic opacity, or synthetic content generation.

This bill proposes the National Artificial Intelligence Code of the Philippines. It is a
unified and enforceable legal framework for AI governance.

The bill creates the Bureau of Artificial Intelligence Systems (BAIS) under the
Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT). The Bureau will serve
as the central regulatory, investigatory, and technical authority over Al systems across public
and private sectors.

It affirms an Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights. This guarantees every Filipino the
right to transparency, redress, data sovereignty, and protection from harmful Al systems. These
rights are matched with enforceable mechanisms such as registration, audits, risk classification,
and documentation.

The bill prohibits harmful Al practices. These include social scoring, real-time mass
surveillance without judicial oversight, impersonation through synthetic media, and opaque
algorithmic manipulation in politics or finance.

To ensure public trust, the bill creates the National Panel of Experts and Resource
Persons on Al. This is a multisectoral body tasked with issuing ethical opinions, reviewing
regulatory proposals, and convening citizen consultations.

The bill mandates the publication of a Code of Artificial Intelligence Regulations
(CAIR). This will serve as the official repository of technical rules and compliance standards.

The measure also creates a regulatory sandbox system for experimental AI
deployments. It requires risk mitigation plans, time-limited exemptions, and public disclosure.
It assigns sector-specific compliance obligations for AI in healthcare, education, finance, law
enforcement, and elections.

Finally, the bill establishes an AI Safety Research Fund, to be administered by the BAIS
and funded annually through the General Appropriations Act.

‘The proposed Code is designed for long-term use. It includes provisions for foresight,
risk classification, moratoriums on emerging threats, and national infrastructure development.
It is intended to be amended as technology evolves, but it sets a clear baseline. The Philippines
needs a single law, coherent and constitutional, that defines what AI can and cannot do.

In view of the foregoing, the immediate approval of this measure is earnestly sought.

Page | 2


Republic of the Philippines
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Quezon City

‘Twentieth Congress
First Regular Session

57

HOUSE BILL NO. _

Introduced by Representative RAYMOND ADRIAN SALCEDA

AN ACT
INSTITUTING THE NATIONAL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE CODE
OF THE PHILIPPINES, CREATING THE BUREAU OF
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS UNDER THE DEPARTMENT OF
INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY, AND
ESTABLISHING A COMPREHENSIVE FRAMEWORK FOR THE SAFE,
ETHICAL, AND INCLUSIVE GOVERNANCE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
SYSTEMS IN THE COUNTRY, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in Congress
assembled:

CHAPTERI
General Provisions

SECTION 1. Short Title. — This Act shall be known as the “National Artificial
Intelligence Code of the Philippines.”

SEC. 2. Declaration of Policy. ~ It is the policy of the State to promote the ethical,
secure, and inclusive development and deployment of Artificial Intelligence (AJ) in a manner
that strengthens national innovation, protects fundamental rights, preserves human dignity, and
advances the public good. The State shall ensure that AI technologies deployed in the
Philippines are human-centric, trustworthy, accountable, and aligned with constitutional and
democratic principles.

SEC. 3. Scope and Coverage. - This Code shall apply to the research, development,
deployment, use, importation, sale, and regulation of Artificial Intelligence systems across all
sectors within the jurisdiction of the Republic of the Philippines. It shall govern both public
and private entities engaged in Al-related activities and all AI systems used in Philippine
territory, including those affecting Philippine citizens through cross-border digital platforms.

SEC. 4. Definition of Terms. — For the purpose of this Act, the following terms are
defined:

Page [1


(a) Artificial Intelligence (Al) refers to any system or software, whether physical or
virtual, that performs tasks which typically require human intelligence, such as reasoning,
perception, leaming, decision-making, planning, or autonomous operation, using
computational models, statistical methods, or other algorithmic techniques.

(b) AI System means a machine-based system that, for explicit or implicit objectives,
processes data to generate outputs, such as predictions, classifications, recommendations, or
decisions — which influence environments or individuals.

(0) High-risk AI System refers to an Al system that, by virtue of its function, deployment
context, or scope, poses a significant risk to the rights, safety, security, or welfare of individuals
or the public, as classified under Section 15 of this Act.

(@) Autonomous AI System means an Al system that, once activated, can operate
independently of real-time human control or continuous supervision, and can alter its behavior
within a bounded scope.

(© Training Data refers to any data set used to train or fine-tune an AI model, whether
labeled or unlabeled, structured or unstructured, synthetic or real.

(f) Model means a mathematical or computational representation, trained on data, that
enables an Al system to generate outputs based on input patterns.

(g) Foundation Model refers to a large-scale AI model trained on broad data sets and
designed to be adaptable for multiple downstream tasks, including through fine-tuning or
prompting.

(h) Generative AI refers to any AI system that can autonomously produce content —
such as text, images, video, audio, code, or synthetic data, intended to resemble or simulate
human-generated outputs.

(i) Algorithmic transparency refers to the degree to which the logic, structure,
assumptions, data inputs, and decision pathways of an AI system can be meaningfully
explained to regulators, affected persons, or external auditors.

(j) Human oversight means the presence of operational procedures and technical
mechanisms allowing humans to understand, intervene in, suspend, or override an AI system’s
behavior where necessary for safety, legality, or accountability.

(k) Deployment means the act of making an Al system operational in any setting where
its outputs may affect real-world outcomes, users, or decisions, whether directly or through
integration into products, services, or government functions.

() BAIS refers to the Bureau of Artificial Intelligence Systems created under Section 6

of this Act, which shall serve as the central regulatory, administrative, and enforcement body
for AI governance in the Philippines.

Page | 2


(m) JACU refers to an Intemal AI Compliance Unit established within a public or
regulated private institution pursuant to Section 12 of this Act, tasked with ensuring internal
adherence to this Code and its implementing rules.

(n) Code of AI Regulations (CAIR) refers to the official compendium of rules,
procedures, templates, technical standards, and interpretive guidance issued by the BAIS
pursuant to this Code.

(0) Regulatory Sandbox refers to a supervised and time-bound environment authorized
by the BAIS in which an AI system may be deployed with conditional exemptions for the
purpose of testing, research, or controlled innovation.

(p) Explainability refers to the property of an AI system by which a human can
understand and articulate the basis of a particular output or behavior of the system, including
how input data contributed to the result.

(q) Bias audit means a systematic evaluation of an AI system for disparate impacts or
discriminatory patterns across demographic or protected groups, conducted using statistical
and contextual tools.

(8) Red teaming means the process of adversarial testing of an AI system to uncover
vulnerabilities, unintended behaviors, or ethical risks, often through stress scenarios or
challenge simulations.

(s) Social scoring means the practice of evaluating or ranking individuals based on
aggregated personal data, behaviors, or reputational metrics, typically used to assign access to
services or benefits.

(®) Synthetic content refers to media or text generated or altered by AI that simulates
the appearance, voice, writing style, likeness, or other attributes of a real or fictional person,
object, or source.

(u) Incident report means a formal submission required under this Code describing an
adverse event, failure, or harmful impact involving an AI system, including technical logs and
mitigation measures taken.

(¥) Profiling means the automated processing of personal data to evaluate, analyze, or
predict aspects of an individual's behavior, preferences, or characteristics.

(w) Downstream deployer refers to any entity that uses, integrates, or embeds an AI
model developed by another party into its own products, systems, or services.

(x) Public-sector AI refers to any Al system developed, procured, operated, or used by
government agencies, including for administrative, operational, policy, or enforcement
Purposes.

(y) Adverse algorithmic outcome refers to any materially harmful result or decision
generated by an Al system that affects an individual’s rights, access to services, employment,
education, liberty, or safety.

Page | 3


(2) Digital dignity means the principle that individuals interacting with AI systems shall
retain their sense of self-worth, agency, and human status, and shall not be treated solely as
data points or optimization targets.

CHAPTER II

Artif Intelligence Rights and Governance

SEC. 5. Bill of Rights in Artificial Intelligence. — In recognition of the transformative
impact of Artificial Intelligence on human life, work, and society, and in order to preserve
human dignity, democratic accountability, and the public good, the State affirms the following
rights of all persons within the jurisdiction of the Republic of the Philippines in relation to the
design, deployment, and use of Artificial Intelligence systems:

(a) The Right to Human Agency. ~ Every individual shall have the right to meaningful
human oversight in decisions that affect their rights, freedoms, opportunities, or safety. No AI
system shall have final authority over such decisions without a mechanism for human review,
correction, or override.

(b) The Right to Algorithmic Transparency. ~ Individuals shall have the right to know
when they are subject to decisions, services, or interactions driven by AI. Such systems must
be explainable in clear, accessible terms, including their purpose, logic, and impact.

(c) The Right to Protection from Unjust Harm, — All persons shall be protected from
algorithmic discrimination, profiling, coercion, or surveillance that infringes upon their dignity,
privacy, or equal treatment under the law.

(@) The Right to Data Sovereignty. — Individuals shall retain meaningful control over
their personal data used in AI systems, including the right to access, correct, delete, or object
to its use, consistent with law. AI systems must be designed to minimize data collection and
preserve contextual integrity.

(e) The Right to Safe and Accountable Systems. — All persons shall be protected from
unsafe or malfunctioning AI systems. High-risk AI systems shall be subject to pre-deployment
review, documentation, and ongoing accountability by a clearly identified human or
institutional actor.

(f) The Right to Contestability and Redress. ~ Individuals adversely affected by an AI
system shall have the right to seek redress, including timely human consideration, correction
of harmful outcomes, and access to legal remedies under this Code and other applicable laws.

(g) The Right to Non-Obsolescence. — The dignity of labor and human capability shall
be preserved. Workers displaced or transformed by AI shall be entitled to just transition
mechanisms, including retraining, reskilling, and employment protections, in accordance with
national development goals.

(h) The Right to Participate in Governance. — Citizens shall have the right to be

consulted on AI policies that affect public life, and to access information, institutions, and
processes that govern the design and deployment of Al technologies.

Page | 4


‘The rights enumerated in this Title shall be interpreted consistently with the operative
provisions of this Code, including but not limited to risk classification, registration, algorithmic
audits, consent requirements, civil remedies, and administrative penalties. Nothing in this Title
shall be construed to limit or diminish any other right or protection provided by law.

SEC. 6. Creation of the Bureau of Artificial Intelligence Systems (BAIS). ~ There is
hereby created a Bureau of Artificial Intelligence Systems (BAIS) under the Department of
Information and Communications Technology (DICT). The BAIS shall serve as the national
regulatory, technical, investigatory, and administrative body on matters relating to the
governance of Artificial Intelligence systems in the Philippines.

The BAIS shall operate under the direct supervision and control of the Secretary of
Information and Communications Technology, who shall exercise overarching authority over
its strategic direction, regulatory priorities, and administrative oversight. All decisions,
issuances, and enforcement actions of the BAIS shall be subject to the policy guidance and
institutional coordination of the DICT.

The DICT shall ensure that the BAIS is fully resourced, staffed, and integrated into the
Department’s digital governance infrastructure. It shall exercise final authority in resolving
jurisdictional questions involving the BAIS and other DICT bureaus, and may issue
supplemental orders to ensure the coherence of national digital policy.

SEC. 7. Mandate and Powers of the Bureau, ~ The BAIS shall have the following
powers and functions:

(a) Formulate and enforce rules, standards, protocols, and technical requirements for
the registration, use, and development of AI systems;

(b) Classify Al systems according to levels of risk and sensitivity, and determine which
systems shall be deemed high-risk for the purposes of this Code;

(c) Maintain the National Registry of Artificial Intelligence Systems and require all
deployers of Al systems to comply with registration requirements;

(@ Conduct pre-deployment reviews, risk assessments, and post-deployment audits of
high-risk Al systems;

(€) Issue orders to suspend, prohibit, or modify the deployment of AI systems that pose
a significant threat to safety, rights, or national security;

(f) Exercise visitorial powers and conduct compliance inspections of public and private
entities subject to this Code;

(g) Refer violations of this Code to the Department of Justice and the appropriate law
enforcement or regulatory agencies for criminal or civil prosecution;

(h) Interpret this Code and its implementing regulations, and issue binding advisory
opinions;

Page | 5


(i) Establish and maintain the Code of Artificial Intelligence Regulations (CAIR),
which shall compile all technical rules, standards, and administrative issuances under this Act;

() Promote the development of domestic AI expertise and systems in accordance with
ethical and human-centered standards;

(k) Perform all other functions necessary to implement the provisions of this Code.

SEC. 8. Organizational Structure of the Bureau. ~ The BAIS shall be headed by a
Bureau Director, who shall be appointed by the Secretary of the DICT. The Bureau shall be
composed of at least the following divisions:

(a) The Division on Algorithmic Standards and Safety, responsible for risk
classification, audits, and certification;

(b) The Division on Ethical Risk and Human Oversight, responsible for enforcing
ethical safeguards and human fallback mechanisms;

(c) The Division on Sectoral Integration and Compliance, responsible for coordinating
with public agencies and regulated sectors;

(d) The Division on Public AI Infrastructure and Research, responsible for national
talent development, open-source resources, and sandbox environments;

(e) The AI Investigations and Enforcement Division, with full administrative authority
to investigate violations, issue subpoenas, and recommend sanctions.

SEC. 9. Interpretive Authority. ~ The BAIS shall have exclusive authority to interpret
this Code and the Code of Artificial Intelligence Regulations. Its interpretations shall be
binding upon all government offices and private entities, unless reversed by the Supreme Court.
In cases of ambiguity, the interpretation that advances human dignity, algorithmic
transparency, and the protection of constitutional rights shall prevail.

Interpretations made in the exercise of quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial functions by
the Bureau shall be presumed valid unless clearly contrary to law.

SEC. 10. Rule-Making and the Code of AI Regulations (CAIR). - The BAIS shall
promulgate rules, regulations, and technical standards to implement this Code. These shall be
compiled into a unified compendium known as the Code of Artificial Intelligence Regulations
(CAIR), which shall be made publicly available and updated quarterly. The CAIR shall serve
as the exclusive repository of all enforceable regulatory issuances relating to Al.

SEC. 11. Consultation and Publication. — The BAIS shall ensure that all proposed
regulations undergo public notice and consultation for not less than fifteen (15) calendar days.
All final rules shall be published in the Official Gazette or a newspaper of general circulation
and posted online through the DICT portal.

SEC. 12. Internal AI Compliance Units (IACUs). ~ All public agencies, government-

owned or -controlled corporations, and regulated private entities that develop or deploy Al
systems shall establish Internal AI Compliance Units (LACUs). These units shall be responsible

Page | 6


for internal monitoring, documentation, and coordination with the BAIS. The Bureau may
deputize such units to conduct self-audits, submit technical reports, or enforce immediate
suspension of unsafe Al use.

SEC. 13. Annual Report to Congress. — The BAIS shall submit an annual report to
Congress, detailing:

(@) the status of AI deployment in the Philippines,
(b) the number and nature of high-risk AI systems registered,
(©) actions taken in enforcement and compliance, and
(4) emerging trends and recommendations for policy or legislative action.
CHAPTER IIT
Ethical and Legal Standards for Artificial Intelligence Systems

SEC. 14, Principles of Ethical AI, - All Artificial Intelligence systems developed,
deployed, imported, or used in the Philippines shall adhere to the following core principles:

(a) Human Dignity — Al systems shall be designed to respect the inherent dignity,
autonomy, and rights of all persons.

(b) Fairness and Non-Discrimination — Al systems shall not result in unjust or
disproportionate discrimination based on race, gender, class, ethnicity, religion, political
beliefs, or other protected characteristics.

(©) Transparency and Explainability — Individuals shall have the right to a meaningful
explanation of how AI systems that affect them function, including their logic, significance,
and foreseeable consequences.

(@) Privacy and Data Protection — Al systems shall comply with the Data Privacy Act
of 2012 and other applicable laws on personal data, and shall minimize unnecessary data
collection.

(©) Accountability - There shall always be a clearly identifiable human or institutional
actor legally and operationally responsible for the outcomes of an AI system.

(f) Safety and Resilience — Al systems shall be developed and tested to ensure their
robustness against errors, attacks, or unintended consequences.

(g) Proportionality — The level of scrutiny, human control, and regulatory compliance
required of an AI system shall be commensurate to its level of risk and potential harm.

SEC. 15. High-Risk AI Systems. ~The BAIS shall classify certain AT systems as high-
risk based on the following factors:

(a) Potential to affect fundamental rights or liberties;

Page |7


(b) Use in critical sectors such as health, finance, education, security, law enforcement,
or government decision-making;

(c) Degree of autonomy and lack of meaningful human oversight;
(d) Use for profiling, biometric identification, surveillance, or predictive policing;
(©) Scale and scope of deployment affecting large populations or essential services.

High-risk AI systems shall be subject to pre-deployment review, mandatory
registration, risk mitigation requirements, and continuous audit under this Code.

SEC. 16. Right to Human Review. — Any person affected by a decision,
recommendation, classification, or denial made primarily by an AI system shall have the right
to request human intervention, review, or override of that decision by a competent and
authorized officer.

SEC. 17. Disclosure Obligations. — Entities deploying AI systems shall disclose, in a
clear and timely manner, the following:

(a) That an AI system is being used;

(b) The general purpose or function of the AI system;

(©) Whether automated decisions are involved; and

(@ Channels for appeal, redress, or correction.

SEC. 18. Consent and Data Ethics. ~'No Al system shall be trained, tested, or deployed
using personal data obtained without informed consent or lawful basis. Data used in AI systems
shall be relevant, accurate, and, where possible, anonymized or de-identified. Individuals shall

retain rights over their personal data in accordance with applicable law.

SEC. 19. Algorithmic Transparency Requirements. — High-risk AI systems shall be

accompanied by the following documentation, subject to BAIS audit:

(a) A description of the model architecture and training dataset;
(b) Evidence of bias testing and mitigation measures;

(c) Explanation of decision-making pathways or output generation;
(4) Records of post-deployment performance monitoring.

SEC. 20. Prohibited Practices. — The following uses of AI systems are strictly
prohibited:

(a) Development or deployment of AI systems for generalized social scoring of
individuals or populations by the State or private entities;

Page | 8


(b) Use of AI to intentionally deceive, impersonate, or manipulate individuals without
clear disclosure, especially in political or financial contexts;

(c) Deployment of autonomous Al systems in contexts where there is no effective
mechanism for human intervention, such as law enforcement use of lethal force;

(@) Use of Al to exploit vulnerable populations, including children, persons with
disabilities, and the elderly, through manipulative digital behavior or targeting.
CHAPTER IV

Sector-Specific Rules and Obligations

SEC. 21. Alin Government Services. — Government agencies deploying Al systems for
administrative, service delivery, policy implementation, or public interface shall:

(a) Register such systems with the BAIS prior to deployment;

(b) Ensure that Al-generated outputs remain subject to human validation and legal
accountability;

(c) Publish a clear statement of the Al system’s function, limitations, and appeal
mechanisms on official platforms; and

(d) Maintain audit logs and records of automated decisions.

The BAIS may exempt intemal-use Al tools or sandboxed systems from full
compliance, provided risks are minimal and documented.

SEC. 22. AI in Education, ~ Al systems used in educational institutions shall:

(a) Reinforce, not replace, the role of human educators;

(b) Avoid profiling or ranking of students beyond legitimate pedagogical objectives;

(c) Provide accessible explanations of Al-driven outputs to students and parents; and

(d) Be disclosed in all relevant schoo! policies and platforms.

The implementation of this section shall be undertaken by the BAIS in consultation
with the Department of Education and the Commission on Higher Education. For experimental

AL uses in education, the BAIS may authorize sandbox deployment subject to review.

SEC. 23. Al in Healthcare and Medical Decision-Making. — No Al system shall be
deployed for diagnostic, triage, treatment, or prioritization without:

(a) Review and certification by the Department of Health, in coordination with the
BAIS;

Page 19


(b) Continuous human oversight by a licensed health professional; and
(©) Full disclosure to patients about the system’s role and limitations.

The BAIS may authorize provisional use of emerging systems under a regulatory
sandbox framework for clinical testing, with appropriate safeguards and reporting protocols.

SEC. 24, Al in Finance, Insurance, and Credit Risk Modeling. — Financial institutions
using AI for pricing, risk modeling, credit scoring, or policy decisions shall:

(a) Disclose the use of AI in such decisions to affected clients;

(b) Conduct and retain bias audits for BAIS review;

(©) Maintain a process for human appeal or override of Al-based denials; and
(d) Submit high-risk models for registration and classification.

BAIS may waive specific reporting requirements for low-volume or low-impact AI
applications, provided that the institution maintains internal compliance documentation.

SEC. 25. AI in Employment and Human Resources. ~ Employers using AI in
recruitment, evaluation, promotion, or termination must:

(a) Inform applicants or employees about the use of such systems;
(b) Conduct fairness assessments and mitigate bias;

(¢) Allow for human intervention or appeal in employment-related AI decisions; and
(d) Retain relevant Al documentation for inspection.

Microenterprises and SMEs may be subject to simplified compliance standards, to be
developed by BAIS in coordination with the Department of Labor and Employment.

SEC. 26. AI in Law Enforcement, Security, and Surveillance. — AI systems used for
profiling, surveillance, forensic analysis, or predictive policing shall be considered high-risk
and may only be deployed under the following conditions:

(a) Written authorization from the Secretary of the Interior and Local Government and
review by the BAIS;

(b) Prohibition of indiscriminate, real-time mass surveillance of public spaces, unless
specifically allowed by law and subject to judicial oversight;

(©) Real-time human control over system outputs; and

(d) Independent post-deployment evaluation.

Page | 10


The BAIS may allow pilot testing of public safety AI systems in a controlled, time-
limited regulatory sandbox with municipal consent and clear public notice.

SEC. 27. AI in Critical Infrastructure and Public Utilities. - Operators of critical
infrastructure — such as power grids, water services, telecommunications, or mass transport ~
shall:

(a) Report any AI system affecting operational safety or continuity to the BAIS;

(b) Conduct simulation-based stress tests under BAIS supervision;

(©) Maintain human override capabilities at all decision layers; and

(d) Submit AI incident reports following significant service disruptions.

The BAIS, in consultation with relevant regulators, may establish differentiated
compliance levels based on the function and criticality of the infrastructure.

SEC. 28. AI in Media, Entertainment, and Content Generation. — Entities using AI to
generate, curate, or manipulate content for public dissemination shall:

(a) Clearly disclose Al-generated content through visible notices;

(b) Label all political, journalistic, or commercial material that involves synthetic or
altered output;

(©) Prohibit impersonation of public figures or real individuals without their prior
consent; and

(4) Implement internal controls to prevent the spread of Al-generated disinformation.

The BAIS may provide model disclosure templates and standards, and shall allow
sandbox testing for Al-driven creative tools that are not deployed at public scale.

CHAPTER V
Offenses, Penalties, and Remedies

SEC. 29. General Liability Framework. ~ Any person, entity, or institution that violates
the provisions of this Code, whether by act or omission, shall be liable under civil,
administrative, or criminal law, depending on the nature and gravity of the violation.

In determining penalties, the following shall be taken into account:

(a) The level of autonomy and risk involved in the AI system;

(b) Whether the violation was willful, reckless, negligent, or in good faith;

(c) The extent of harm or rights infringement caused;

Page | 11


(d) The presence or absence of prior compliance efforts; and

(e) Whether corrective action was taken promptly upon notice.

SEC. 30. Unauthorized Deployment of High-Risk Al. ~ The deployment of any high-
risk AI system without prior registration, pre-deployment review, or mandatory documentation
shall be subject to:

(a) An administrative fine not exceeding Five Million Pesos (P5,000,000) per violation;

(b) Immediate suspension or prohibition of system use by order of the BAIS; and

(c) Mandatory corrective filing within thirty (30) days.

The BAIS may allow first-time violators to remedy noncompliance within a grace
period, provided no substantial harm has occurred.

SEC. 31. Failure to Disclose Al Use. — Failure to disclose the use of AI in contexts
where this Code or the Code of AI Regulations requires notification shall be subject to:

(a) An administrative fine of up to Two Million Pesos (P2,000,000);
(b) Mandatory issuance of disclosure or public notice within fifteen (15) days; and
(c) Public posting of an errata statement or audit result, where applicable.

SEC. 32. Deployment of Prohibited AI Practices. - The development or deployment of
Al systems for the following prohibited purposes shall constitute a criminal offense:

(a) Generalized social scoring of individuals or groups;

(b) Unauthorized biometric surveillance or profiling of the general public;

(c) Deepfake impersonation of public officials or real individuals without consent; and

(d) Use of AI for deceptive political or financial manipulation.

Violators shall be punished by imprisonment of not less than six (6) months nor more
than six (6) years, or a fine of not more than Ten Million Pesos (P10,000,000), or both, without
prejudice to prosecution under other applicable laws.

SEC. 33. Corporate and Institutional Liability. ~ If a violation is committed by a
juridical person, such as a corporation, partnership, association, university, or public agency,
the following shall be jointly and severally liable:

(a) The entity itself;

(b) The officer or employee who authorized, directed, or allowed the violation; and

Page | 12


(c) The compliance officer or IACU head who failed to report or prevent the violation,
if gross negligence is established.

SEC. 34. Civil Remedies. — Any person whose rights were infringed upon as a result of
unlawful AI deployment or use may file an action for:

(a) Injunctive relief;

(b) Actual, moral, or exemplary damages;

(©) Correction or deletion of personal data; and
(@ Public retraction, if warranted.

SEC. 35. Administrative Sanctions. — In addition to fines, the BAIS may impose any of
the following:

(a) Blacklisting from government procurement or partnership;

(b) Public disclosure of non-compliant entities;

(c) Revocation of deployment licenses or certifications; and

(a) Mandatory third-party audits for a defined compliance period.

SEC. 36. Whistleblower and Safe Harbor Protections. — Individuals who report
violations of this Code in good faith shall be protected from retaliation. Likewise, entities that

self-report noncompliance and act to promptly correct the same may, at the discretion of the
BAIS, be granted mitigation of penalties or exemption from prosecution.

CHAPTER VI
Innovation, Public Infrastructure, and National Capacity
SEC. 37. National AI Infrastructure. — The Department of Information and
Communications Technology, through the Bureau of Artificial Intelligence Systems, shall
establish and maintain shared national infrastructure to support the ethical and inclusive
development of AI technologies. This shall include:

(a) Public compute facilities accessible to accredited academic and research
institutions;

(b) National datasets and data commons with appropriate anonymization protocols;
(©) Version-controlled libraries of open-source Al models and codebases; and

(d) Secure environments for privacy-preserving data sharing and experimentation.

Page | 13


SEC. 38. Regulatory Sandbox Programs. — The BAIS shall implement regulatory
sandbox programs that allow for time-limited, supervised deployment of AI systems for
research, innovation, or emerging applications. The sandbox shall:

(a) Permit conditional exemptions from specific compliance requirements;

(b) Be subject to application, review, and publication of key terms;

(c) Require risk mitigation plans and user transparency; and

(d) Be time-bound, with mandatory reporting of results and learnings.

SEC. 39. Support for Domestic AI Model Development. - The State shall promote the
development of locally built AI systems and language models, particularly those tailored to
Philippine languages, cultural contexts, and institutional needs. This shall include:

(a) Grants and challenge programs to stimulate ethical innovation;

(b) Preferential research support for projects aligned with public interest goals; and

(©) Partnerships with academic, private, and international institutions, subject to
transparency standards.

SEC. 40. National Al Research and Testing Facilities. The DICT and the Department
of Science and Technology shall coordinate the establishment of National AI Research and
Testing Centers to serve as neutral platforms for:

(a) Model validation and bias testing;

(b) Benchmarking performance standards;

(c) Human-in-the-loop design evaluations; and

(d) Training of public officials and regulatory staff on emerging technologies.

SEC. 41. AI Education and Talent Development. — The Commission on Higher
Education, in consultation with the BAIS, shall issue curriculum standards and faculty
development programs to promote AI literacy, ethics, and technical skill-building. These shall
include:

(a) Undergraduate and graduate degree tracks in Al and data science;

(b) Ethical AI modules across technical and non-technical disciplines;

(c) Scholarships and research fellowships for Filipino AI talent; and

(d) Training-of-trainers programs to broaden faculty capacity.

Page | 14


SEC. 42. Technology Transfer and Knowledge-Sharing. — The DICT shall issue
policies to encourage technology transfer from foreign entities operating AI systems in the
Philippines, including:

(a) Disclosure of model characteristics and documentation;
(b) Publication of localized performance evaluations; and
(©) Sharing of best practices, toolkits, and deployment safeguards.

Foreign AI providers that do not meet minimum transparency thresholds may be barred
from certain public sector contracts or sandbox participation.

SEC. 43. AI Safety Research Fund, ~ There is hereby created an Al Safety Research
Fund, to be administered by the BAIS and funded through annual General Appropriations. The
fund shall support:

(a) Independent safety and bias evaluations;
(b) Grants for red-teaming and adversarial testing of AI systems;
(c) Academic and policy research on long-term risks and safeguards; and

(d) Development of AI safety benchmarks for national adoption.

CHAPTER VII
Roles of National Government Agencies

SEC. 44. Role of the Department of Information and Communications Technology. —
‘The Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT) shall serve as the
principal agency responsible for the implementation of this Act. Through the Bureau of
Artificial Intelligence Systems (BAIS), the DICT shall exercise regulatory, administrative,
investigatory, and enforcement functions over Artificial Intelligence systems in the Philippines
as provided in Title II of this Code.

SEC. 45. Role of the Department of Science and Technology. ~ The Department of
Science and Technology (DOST) shall support the implementation of this Act by working with
the DICT and the BAIS in establishing National AI Research and Testing Centers. It shall
provide funding, technical support, and laboratory infrastructure for Al-related scientific
research and model development especially in areas such as health, agriculture, climate, and
disaster risk reduction. It shall facilitate technology transfer and help build local innovation
ecosystems for Al applications. It shall also assist in creating science-based metrics for
evaluating AI performance, detecting bias, and ensuring safety.

SEC. 46. Role of the Commission on Higher Education. — The Commission on Higher
Education (CHED) shall ensure that Artificial Intelligence is integrated into relevant higher
education curricula. It shall coordinate with the BAIS in setting academic standards for Al-
related programs, recognizing faculty and research centers of excellence, and supporting
postgraduate research aligned with the goals of this Act.

Page | 15


SEC. 47. Role of the Department of Trade and Industry. ~ The Department of Trade
and Industry (DTI) shall promote responsible adoption of Artificial Intelligence in the private
sector. It shall assist micro, small, and medium enterprises in adopting AI technologies and
shall promote the development of trustworthy and export-ready AI products. It shall also
coordinate with the BAIS in setting sector-specific standards and in supporting companies with
compliance and technical guidance.

SEC. 48. Role of the Department of Health. — The Department of Health (DOH) shall
ensure that Artificial Intelligence systems used in healthcare are safe, ethical, and well-
regulated. It shall approve systems intended for diagnostic, triage, and treatment purposes in
coordination with the BAIS and shall monitor post-deployment effects on public health. It shall
also take part in any pilot or sandbox programs involving Al in clinical settings.

SEC. 49. Role of the Department of Education. ~ The Department of Education
(DepEd) shall work with the BAIS and CHED to support ethical and effective integration of
Artificial Intelligence in basic education. It shall ensure that AI tools used for instruction,
grading, or administration do not violate students’ rights or compromise pedagogical integrity.
It shall also establish standards that promote transparency, safety, and educational value in
school-based Al applications.

SEC. 50. Role of the Department of Labor and Employment. ~The Department of Labor
and Employment (DOLE) shall monitor the impact of Artificial Intelligence on employment
patterns and workplace fairness. It shall work with the BAIS to design compliance standards
for AI use in recruitment, evaluation, and termination. It shall also lead programs that equip
workers with skills needed to remain competitive in a labor market affected by automation.

SEC. 51. Role of the National Privacy Commission. ~ The National Privacy
Commission (NPC) shall coordinate with the BAIS to ensure that Artificial Intelligence
systems comply with the Data Privacy Act of 2012. It shall advise on consent requirements,
data minimization practices, and other lawful processing safeguards. It may issue joint
guidelines with the BAIS to resolve privacy issues specific to automated processing and
algorithmic profiling.

SEC. 52. Role of the Philippine Statistics Authority. ~The Philippine Statistics
Authority (PSA) shall ensure that public data used in Artificial Intelligence development is
statistically sound, representative, and ethically released. It shall coordinate with the BAIS to
prepare and release datasets designated for the National Data Commons for Al. It shall support
government agencies and researchers in structuring and documenting data for lawful and
transparent reuse. It shall report annually to the BAIS on data access, faimess, and observed
risks or harms resulting from the use of PSA-managed datasets.

SEC. 53. Role of the National Economic and Development Authority. ~ The National
Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) shall incorporate Artificial Intelligence into
development planning and policy evaluation. It shall assess the effects of Al on productivity,
inequality, public service delivery, and labor transformation. It shall support the inclusion of
AI goals and safeguards in the Philippine Development Plan and advise other agencies on
innovation-aligned investments.

Page | 16


SEC. 54. Role of the Department of Justice. — The Department of Justice (DOJ) shall
provide legal guidance on the rights and remedies available to individuals harmed by Artificial
Intelligence. It shall work with the BAIS to design prosecutorial protocols for algorithmic
discrimination, negligence, and other Al-related offenses. It shall also ensure that constitutional
guarantees such as due process and equal protection are observed in the design and enforcement
of AI regulation.

SEC. 55. Role of the Supreme Court and the Judiciary. - The Judiciary shall be
encouraged to develop training and internal policies to evaluate the use of Artificial Intelligence
in courts and legal proceedings. It shall assess how Al-generated evidence may be received,
how automated systems affect access to justice, and how safeguards should be applied in
judicial administration.

SEC. 56. Role of the Department of Foreign Affairs. - The Department of Foreign
Affairs (DFA) shall represent the Philippines in international efforts to shape Artificial
Intelligence governance. It shall promote Philippine interests in treaty negotiations, global
standards, and research cooperation. It shall coordinate with the BAIS on building strategic
partnerships that support AI safety and ethical development.

SEC. 57. Role of the Department of the Interior and Local Government. ~ The
Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) shall supervise the responsible
deployment of Artificial Intelligence by local government units. It shall ensure that local
projects comply with the requirements of this Act and that all high-risk AI applications are
reviewed and documented in accordance with BAIS guidance.

SEC. 58. Role of the National Telecommunications Commission. — The National
Telecommunications Commission (NTC) shall oversee the use of Artificial Intelligence by
telecommunications providers. It shall ensure that Al-enabled practices such as traffic
management and content filtering do not result in discrimination or manipulation. It shall
coordinate with the BAIS on reporting and audit obligations for AI deployed in public
communications infrastructure.

SEC. 59. Role of the Civil Service Commission. — The Civil Service Commission (CSC)
shall ensure that Artificial Intelligence systems used in public sector human resource
management are consistent with merit, transparency, and fairness. It shall guide agencies in the
ethical use of AI for hiring, promotions, and evaluation. It shall also support civil servants in
building capacity for Al oversight and accountability.

SEC. 60. Role of the Commission on Elections. - The Commission on Elections
(COMELEC) shall regulate the use of Artificial Intelligence in electoral technologies and
campaign activity. It shall prevent the use of AI for voter manipulation, automated
disinformation, and synthetic impersonation. It shall coordinate with the BAIS to evaluate and
approve all proposed uses of Al in voting, counting, or public messaging.

SEC. 61. Role of the Anti-Red Tape Authority. ~ The Anti-Red Tape Authority (ARTA)
shall support the use of Artificial Intelligence to streamline frontline services and reduce
bureaucratic burden. It shall work with the BAIS to verify that such systems do not cause
exclusion or discrimination and that they remain explainable and accountable. It shall promote
ethical Al adoption in public service delivery under its ease of doing business mandate.

Page | 17


SEC. 62. Role of the Department of Budget and Management. ~ The Department of
Budget and Management (DBM) shall ensure that funding requests for Artificial Intelligence
systems include appropriate risk assessments and compliance documentation. It shall support
uilding in the public sector and coordinate with the BAIS to avoid duplication
e investments aligned with national objectives.

CHAPTER VIII
Emerging Technologies, Public Safety, and Adaptive Measures

SEC. 63. Transitory Exercise of Powers. — Until the Bureau of Artificial Intelligence
Systems is fully constituted, the Secretary of the Department of Information and
Communications Technology shall exercise the powers and responsibilities of the Bureau
under this Title in an ex officio capacity. The Secretary shall apply the precautionary principles,
risk mitigation standards, and ethical safeguards provided in this Act when exercising such
authority.

SEC. 64. Authority to Address Emerging Risks. — The Bureau may issue precautionary
advisories, interim safeguards, or temporary moratoriums in response to Artificial Intelligence
applications that present new, unregulated, or escalating risks to human rights, national
security, democratic institutions, or ecological systems. These emergency measures shall not
exceed twelve months in duration unless formally extended or replaced by permanent
regulation.

SEC. 65. AI Applications in Policing and Public Order. — No Artificial Intelligence
system shall be deployed for policing, crime prediction, crowd monitoring, or automated
enforcement of public order laws including traffic violations without prior approval from the
Bureau. This approval shall be granted in coordination with the Department of the Interior and
Local Government and the Commission on Human Rights. AI tools for facial recognition,
license plate reading, real-time surveillance, predictive policing, and automated profiling are
considered high-risk and shall not be used unless they undergo sandbox evaluation, public
disclosure, and publication of safeguards. The Bureau may suspend or revoke the deployment
of any public safety AI system that undermines civil liberties or due process.

SEC. 66. Experimental AI Systems. — The Bureau may authorize time-bound
deployments of experimental AI systems that fall outside existing classifications through a
regulatory sandbox. These deployments must include risk documentation, user safeguards,
real-time monitoring, and defined geographic or functional limits, All systems deployed in this
manner shall be subject to regular evaluation and may be suspended at any time if risks emerge.

SEC. 67. AI Systems with Unanticipated Behavior. ~ Any person or entity responsible
for deploying an AI system that exhibits unanticipated, sclf-modifying, or emergent behavior
shall report the event to the Bureau without delay. The Bureau may require that such systems
be suspended, modified, or withdrawn pending a technical safety review. AI systems showing
emergent behavior shall not operate autonomously in health, defense, law enforcement, or
critical infrastructure domains.

SEC. 68. Systemic Failure and Emergency Response Planning. ~ The Bureau shall

develop and regularly update a contingency framework for systemic AI failure events in
coordination with the National Disaster Risk Reduction and Management Council and other

Page | 18


concerned agencies. This framework shall include procedures for addressing algorithmic
service disruption, coordinated adversarial attacks, misinformation campaigns, and the collapse
or malfunction of high-impact AI services. It shall also include mechanisms to detect and
contain cascading failures triggered by Al-driven trading systems, credit evaluation models, or
automated financial platforms. The Bureau shall conduct regular simulations and maintain a
registry of AI systems that require kill-switches or human failover protocols.

SEC. 69. Financial Applications and Systemic Market Risks. — Artificial Intelligence
systems used in banking, credit scoring, insurance, securities trading, asset management, or
financial infrastructure shall be subject to enhanced scrutiny by the Bureau in coordination with
the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Insurance
Commission. The Bureau may require pre-deployment review, stress testing, and algorithmic
transparency documentation to ensure that such systems do not cause excessive volatility,
herding behavior, opacity, or systemic contagion. Institutions shall report to the Bureau any
algorithmic anomalies that materially affect multiple firms, sectors, or markets. AI systems
used in autonomous trading or high-frequency environments must incorporate circuit-breaking
logic and human override capacity. The Bureau shall issue advisories or suspend deployments
that undermine financial stability, consumer protection, or regulatory parity.

SEC. 70. Horizon Scanning and Future Preparedness. - The Bureau shall establish a
permanent foresight unit to monitor global trends in advanced Artificial Intelligence
development including Artificial General Intelligence, autonomous weapons, machine
personhood claims, and other emerging technologies. This unit shall conduct scenario
planning, evaluate long-term regulatory challenges, and submit a comprehensive strategic risk
report to Congress every four years with recommendations for policy and institutional reform.

CHAPTER IX
National Panel of Experts on Artificial Intelligence

SEC. 71. Creation of the National Panel of Experts and Resource Persons on Artificial
Intelligence. ~ There is hereby established a National Panel of Experts and Resource Persons
on Artificial Intelligence (NPER-AD), an independent, multisectoral, and consultative body
composed of Filipino experts and civic representatives. The Panel shall serve as an institutional
advisory mechanism to the Bureau of Artificial Intelligence Systems and shall support ethical
foresight, public dialogue, and long-term governance of Artificial Intelligence in the
Philippines,

SEC. 72. Mandate and Functions. - The National Panel of Experts and Resource
Persons on Artificial Intelligence shall have the following functions:

(a) Provide ethical oversight and advice by reviewing and issuing non-binding opinions
on Al systems or regulatory actions that raise novel, high-risk, or controversial societal
concems, including those involving public safety, surveillance, labor displacement, and digital
manipulation.

(b) Facilitate public engagement and consultation by convening town halls, hearings,

and citizen forums on proposed AI regulations or deployments, in partnership with the Bureau
and relevant agencies.

Page | 19


(©) Conduct emerging risk foresight by identifying, analyzing, and publicly reporting
on speculative or long-term risks associated with Artificial Intelligence, including potential
societal, economic, and cultural disruptions.

(d) Submit an annual AI Ethics and Public Impact Report to Congress, the President,
and the general public, containing recommendations on legislative reform, oversight
mechanisms, and public education strategies.

(@) Issue advisory reviews and written opinions on draft rules, guidelines, or major Al
deployments referred to it by the Bureau. Where the Bureau adopts a position contrary to the
Panel’s recommendation, it shall issue a written explanation outlining its rationale and the
considerations taken.

SEC. 73. Composition and Appointment. — The National Panel of Experts and Resource
Persons on Artificial Intelligence shall be composed of nine (9) members, appointed by the
President of the Philippines upon recommendation of the Secretary of Information and
Communications Technology. The Panel shall be composed of:

(1) One (1) artificial intelligence researcher or machine learning expert;

(2) One (1) ethicist, philosopher, or religious scholar with a demonstrated body of work
on Al ethics;

(3) One (1) labor sector representative, preferably from a national labor organization ot
union;

(4) One (1) human rights or data privacy legal expert;

(5) One (1) sociologist, anthropologist, or public interest technologist;

(6) One (1) representative of the youth or academic sector under the age of thirty (30);

(7) One (1) regional representative from Visayas or Mindanao, rotating every three (3)
years;

(8) One (1) representative from the private innovation sector, preferably from a startup
or MSME; and

(9) One (1) media practitioner or researcher on disinformation, algorithmic harms, or
information integrity.

SEC. 74. Term and Compensation. - Members of the Panel shall serve a term of three
(3) years, renewable once. They shall receive honoraria and allowances as may be determined
by the Department of Budget and Management, subject to existing rules and availability of
funds.

SEC. 75. Secretariat Support. - The Panel shall be supported by a Secretariat to be
provided by the Department of Information and Communications Technology, in coordination
with the Bureau of Artificial Intelligence Systems. The Secretariat shall provide technical,
logistical, and research assistance to enable the Panel to fulfill its functions.

Page | 20


CHAPTER X
Transition, Implementation, and Final Provisions

SEC. 76. Initial Appropriations. ~The amount necessary for the initial implementation
of this Act shall be charged against the current appropriations of the Department of Information
and Communications Technology. Thereafter, such sums as may be necessary for the continued
operation of the Bureau of Artificial Intelligence Systems and the programs under this Code
shall be included in the annual General Appropriations Act.

SEC. 77. Organizational Transition. — Within ninety (90) days from the effectivity of
this Act, the DICT shall establish the organizational structure, staffing pattern, and operating
procedures of the Bureau of Artificial Intelligence Systems, subject to existing laws, civil
service rules, and budgetary availability. All existing offices and units within the DICT
engaged in AI policy or regulation shall be reorganized under the BAIS.

Pending the full establishment of the Bureau, the Secretary of the DICT may exercise
all powers and functions necessary to enforce the provisions of this Act and may designate an
interim unit or officer to perform the functions of the BAIS.

SEC. 78. Publication of the Code of AI Regulations, ~ Within one hundred eighty (180)
days ftom the effectivity of this Act, the BAIS shall publish the initial version of the Code of
Artificial Intelligence Regulations (CAIR), which shall contain the technical rules, compliance
procedures, forms, standards, and interpretive guidance necessary for the implementation of
this Code.

SEC. 79. Annual Reporting and Review. — The BAIS shall submit an annual report to
Congress, which shall include:

(a) The status of AI system registrations and deployments;

(b) The results of compliance actions and enforcement activities;

(c) Recommendations for legislative or regulatory refinement; and

(@ Emerging risks and trends in AI development and use.

Congress shall conduct a comprehensive review of this Code every three (3) years, with
the option to revise, consolidate, or expand its provisions based on technological developments
and societal needs.

SEC. 80. Implementing Rules and Regulations. — Within ninety (90) days from the
effectivity of this Act, the DICT shall, in consultation with relevant agencies, promulgate the
necessary implementing rules and regulations for its enforcement. Such rules shall take effect

fifteen (15) days after their publication in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general
circulation.

Page | 21


In the formulation of the implementing rules and regulations, the BAIS shall consult
the National Privacy Commission, the Department of Justice, the Civil Service Commission,
and other relevant agencies to ensure harmonization with existing regulatory frameworks.

SEC. 81. Repealing Clause, ~The following provisions, laws, and issuances are hereby
repealed, amended, or modified insofar as they are inconsistent with the provisions of this Act:

(a) Section 12 of Republic Act No. 10175, otherwise known as the “Cybercrime
Prevention Act of 2012,” which authorizes real-time collection of traffic data without court
order, is hereby deemed inapplicable to the use of Artificial Intelligence systems for
surveillance or profiling, unless such use complies with the registration, human oversight, and
transparency requirements of this Act. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to revive any
provision previously declared unconstitutional.

(b) All administrative rules, procurement guidelines, and intemal policies of public
agencies that authorize the development, acquisition, or deployment of AI systems without risk
classification, registration, documentation, or ethical safeguards as required by this Act are
hereby repealed, amended, or rendered without effect to the extent of such inconsistency.

(©) Any law, regulation, or policy that grants finality, legal force, or presumptive
validity to Al-generated outputs or decisions without a mechanism for human review, override,
or appeal shall be deemed modified in accordance with this Act.

(@) All other laws, presidential decrees, executive orders, rules and regulations, or parts
thereof which are inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed, amended, or
modified accordingly.

SEC. 82. Suppletory Clause. - This Act shall be construed in harmony with existing
laws on data privacy, cybersecurity, procurement, public accountability, and sector-specific

regulation.

In particular, Republic Act No. 10173, or the “Data Privacy Act of 2012,” shall apply
in a suppletory manner. Nothing in the Data Privacy Act shall be construed to prohibit
algorithmic audits, red-teaming, bias testing, or post-deployment evaluations required under
this Act, provided such activities are conducted in accordance with the principles of lawful
processing, legitimate purpose, proportionality, and data minimization, and are subject to
appropriate safeguards as determined by the Bureau of Artificial Intelligence Systems.

SEC. 83. Separability Clause. — If any portion or provision of this Act is declared
invalid or unconstitutional, other provisions hereof shall remain in full force and effect.

SEC. 84. Effectivity. — This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its publication
in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation.

Approved,

Page | 22