Vague "Misleading" Standard Chills Speech

This provision defines false information using subjective terms like "misleading" and "deceptive" alongside objective falsity, creating legal uncertainty about what speech is prohibited. While the burden of proof lies with the accuser (a protective safeguard), the inclusion of "misleading" as a standalone category deviates from international best practice—democracies typically focus false information laws on objectively verifiable falsehoods, not subjective judgments about presentation. The "partial truth doctrine" (19.3) is particularly problematic: determining whether an omission makes something "more misleading than true" requires highly subjective judgment and could chill legitimate selective reporting and investigative journalism. Speakers cannot reliably predict whether factually accurate statements will be deemed "misleading," undermining legal certainty and enabling potentially arbitrary enforcement.