Skip to main content

PeakMetrics / Fact Checks

Politics & government fact checks

Explore claims publishers have checked about politics & government. Read their original ratings and follow the evidence.

12,752 published reviews in this topic

המשרוקית של גלובסPolitics & government

ישראל היא אחת המדינות היחידות שבהן "האחים המוסלמים" חוקית?

Publisher’s rating: לא נכון

The review examined Dudi Amsalem’s statement about Ra’am and the Islamic Movement, the movement’s relationship to the Muslim Brotherhood, and whether comparable affiliated groups are legally excluded elsewhere. It identifies Ra’am as the political arm of the southern, more moderate branch of Israel’s Islamic Movement, described as a sister movement to the Muslim Brotherhood. The investigation’s central distinction is between the unusual level of Ra’am’s formal political participation in Israel and the broader question of whether affiliated movements or organizations are legal in other countries. The review concludes that Israel is not nearly the only country where Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organizations are not outlawed. It reports that, in many Muslim countries—including Sudan, Somalia, Tunisia and Qatar—groups associated with the Brotherhood operate political and social organizations legally. It also says that in most countries, including in the West and the Arab world, Brotherhood-linked activity is not formally banned. The examples of bans or restrictions are presented as exceptions: the review names Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Russia and some Central Asian countries, and says Austria made membership in the movement or public display of its symbols an offense. It notes that similar legislative efforts in Britain and the United States failed. The qualification is that Ra’am’s position is unusual in a different respect. The review quotes Tel Aviv University professor Uriah Shavit saying that there is no equivalent in Europe to a Brotherhood-affiliated movement holding political representation at Ra’am’s level. But it explains that the lack of comparable European representation does not establish that such movements are illegal: in many places, groups have ideological ties without operating politically under the Brotherhood’s name. The review therefore rejects the claim’s broad assertion about legality while distinguishing it from the narrower point that Ra’am’s political role is exceptional.

Fact Crescendo Sri LankaPolitics & government

FACT CHECK: බිමල් රත්නායකගේ බෙන්තර සුපිරි නිවස?

Publisher’s rating: False

The review investigated social-media posts presenting photographs of a building and swimming pool as Bimal Rathnayake’s “luxury house” in Bentota. It also examined a post framed as a denial from Rathnayake, which said the images were of a tourist hotel belonging to his father-in-law. The review’s central question was whether the pictured property was actually owned by Rathnayake or his family. To identify the photographs, the investigators say they used Google Reverse Image Search. They found the images associated with Bentota No 1, a tourist villa in Bentota, and compared them with pictures posted on the villa’s Facebook page and an image on TripAdvisor. The review also reports contacting the villa’s management, which said Rathnayake and his family had no connection to or responsibility for the property. The JVP media unit likewise told the investigators that the claim was part of a false campaign targeting him. The review further says it checked Rathnayake’s official Twitter account and found no post matching the purported statement circulating on social media. Its conclusion rests on identifying the photographed place as Bentota No 1 and on the management’s denial of any ownership connection to Rathnayake or his family. The excerpt does not provide independent ownership records, so the account of the investigation is limited to the checks and statements it describes.

FACTLYPolitics & government

‘P. Chidambaram lived in a house owned by his wife and claimed monthly rent of 20 lakhs from the government for 10 years’

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The post alleged that P. Chidambaram lived in a house owned by his wife and claimed 20 lakhs in monthly rent from the government for 10 years. FACTLY’s review addresses that specific allegation and says Rajya Sabha website information identifies Chidambaram as residing in government-allotted accommodation in Delhi, rather than the private residence described in the post. The review concludes that the government was not paying rent for a private home on his behalf. The review also explains the relevant accommodation and payment rules: MPs are generally entitled to rent-free accommodation in Delhi, but if an MP chooses to live in a private house, the MP bears the rental expense. It further says the Rajya Sabha’s monthly information on members’ salaries and allowances lists constituency and office expense allowances, but does not show an additional rent allowance for Chidambaram. These points directly contradict the post’s claim that he received the alleged payment. The article also addresses claims bundled into the post about government offices and the Central Vista project. It reports that the government had said there was no centrally maintained data on spending by government establishments to rent office space in Delhi. It separately clarifies that the one-lakh-rupee fine mentioned in the post concerned a Delhi High Court petition about pausing Central Vista construction during COVID-19 restrictions—not a Supreme Court ruling about Chidambaram’s housing or rent. The review says the Supreme Court later declined to interfere with that judgment.

FACTLYPolitics & government

Photo of Union Minister Smriti Irani drinking alcohol and preparing counter tweets to Rahul Gandhi

Publisher’s rating: FALSE

The claim concerns a photo said to show Union Minister Smriti Irani drinking alcohol while preparing counter-tweets to Rahul Gandhi. FACTLY reports that the image circulating with that claim was altered: the original showed Irani interacting with co-workers in a video meeting, not watching Rahul Gandhi on her laptop. The glass beside her contained water, not alcohol. These findings address the two central visual allegations in the claim. [S1: “The photo shared in the post is a morphed one. The original image shows Smriti Irani interacting with her co-workers through a video conference. Also, the glass placed beside Smriti Irani was filled with water, not alcohol.”] The review says it found the original image on Irani’s official Instagram account and identifies its caption and date. It also distinguishes that original image from the altered version: the laptop in the original showed a video meeting. The supplied excerpt does not describe a separate check of whether Irani was preparing counter-tweets, so the conclusion is grounded in the image’s altered content and the original image’s different setting. [S1: “When we searched for this image on Union Minister Smriti Irani’s official social media handles, we found this image to be published on Smriti Irani’s Instagram handle on 09 December 2020. Smriti Irani shared this image with a caption, ‘Pandemic mornings’. But the original image did not show Smriti Irani watching Rahul Gandhi on her laptop. In the original photo, Smriti Irani was seen interacting in a video meeting on her laptop.”]

YouturnPolitics & government

திருச்சி மாவட்டம், திருச்சி மேற்கு தொகுதியைச் சேர்ந்த அ.துரைமுருகன்(16450527843) கட்சியின் கட்டுப்பாட்டை மீறி செயற்பட்டதையடுத்து ஒழுங்கு நடவடிக்கை குழுவின் அறிவுறுத்தலின்படி, அவர் வகித்து வந்த பொறுப்பிலிருந்தும் அடிப்படை உறுப்பினரிலிருந்தும் முழுமையாக நீக்கப்படுகிறார். அதனால் அவரது கருத்திற்கோ செயலுக்கோ இனி கட்சி பொறுப்பேற்காது – நாம் தமிழர் கட்சி

Publisher’s rating: Fake