Scams have become a daily threat in the Philippines. Anyone with a phone or a social-media account has likely experienced one.  The recent report from Whoscall and the Global Anti-Scam Alliance show that close to eight in ten Filipino adults say they have encountered a scam in the last 12 months.  That alone tells us this is not a niche concern, but rather it is national in scale.

The sophistication and scale of scams in the Philippines are exacerbated by underlying policy gaps that allow cybercriminals to exploit vulnerable Filipinos online. Although it is important to note that the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas issued the implementing rules for the Anti-Financial Account Scamming Act. The regulations require financial institutions to enhance fraud detection, allow regulated inquiries into scam-linked accounts and implement real-time tracking and temporary holding of disputed funds. However, the country still has no unified anti-scam policy that treats digital literacy and cyber hygiene as essential skills. While it is important to develop laws and policies, teaching people how to protect themselves remains a critical part of building scam resilience.

The Anti-Scam Quad Model: Focusing on the Philippine Approach

This is where efforts from not only the government and the private sector, but also non-profit organisations, are crucial.  One example is from Scam Watch Pilipinas where a movement was built on a framework of the Anti-Scam Quad Model. This approach aims to employ a practical, culturally-grounded way shaped around the way Filipinos actually behave online.

The “Filipino” way of combatting scams can be built on the following pillars:

• Changing behavior through the Kontra-Scam Attitude, which includes protecting your information (magdamot), thinking twice (magduda), ignoring suspicious messages (mang-isnab), and reporting immediately to scam hotline 1326 (magsumbong).
• Mobilising citizens through local volunteer watchers;
• Building cross-sector collaboration with government, private industry, civil society, and media; and
• Making reporting easier through 1326, Scam Vault PH, Whoscall, and the eGovPH

On the ground, the impact has been even more meaningful. For example, Scam Watch Pilipinas has ran online campaigns like #HolidayWatchPH, #UnMatchPH, and #OnlineBantayLakbay to raise awareness and reach millions. In addition, the Volunteer Watcher Program brought digital-safety education to communities that rarely receive it. Finally, easier reporting tools helped fuel enforcement actions and contributed to the takedown of several scam hubs across the country.

Policy Recommendations

To further promote resilience in the Philippines, there are a few recommendations that decision-makers should consider:

• First, the national government must build a Unified National Anti-Scam Policy Framework that pulls everyone in the same direction. This would help resolve the overlapping mandates and the siloed approach that hinders effective anti-scam efforts. Operationally, this means that the Department of Information and Communications Technology (DICT), the Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center (CICC), the Philippine National Police – Anti-Cybercrime Group (PNP-ACG), the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI), the National Privacy Commission (NPC), the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC), the Department of Education (DepEd), the Commission on Higher Education (CHED), local government units (LGUs), and the private sector should all refer to a single document to ensure they are moving in the same direction.

• Second, scam prevention must be treated as a nationwide education effort. Digital literacy and cyber hygiene should not be optional. They should be part of the school curriculum, workplace training, barangay or community learning programs, and national media campaigns. While there are non-profit organisations that are doing this already, scaling it requires government policy, funding, and coordination.

• Finally, we need a stronger, more interconnected system for tech-enabled reporting so ordinary citizens can actively defend themselves. Banks, telcos, fintechs, marketplaces, and online platforms should feed into a single reporting database. When information flows quickly, authorities can respond faster, identify patterns earlier, and dismantle scam networks more effectively. This would also mean that data governance and data-sharing agreements must be sufficiently robust to ensure that information flows securely across sectors and industries.

Advancing a Multi-Stakeholder, Locally-Developed Response

Aside from government agencies, non-profit organisations have shown that people-centred, education-led, and technology-supported approaches can contribute meaningfully to addressing online scams, even when operating with limited resources. What remains lacking is broader national uptake and the policy commitment required to support and scale such efforts.

Locally-developed models already exist and have demonstrated practical impact. These approaches underscore the importance of placing communities and users at the centre of responses to online harms.The challenge now is to develop a national policy framework that reflects both the urgency of the scam problem and the value of non-profit-led, homegrown approaches that are already in place.