Comelec moves to allay all fears and suspicions on 2016 elections

TO this day, some doubts persist over some election results because of alleged cheating in the automated elections of 2010 and 2013. To be sure, there have always been attempts to cheat in all our elections, ranging from vote-buying to ballot box snatching to “dagdag-bawas” manipulations. But automation appeared to have raised these cheating attempts to a new level, and the output of PCOS (Precinct Count Optical Scan) machines came to be derided as the product of so much “hocus-PCOS.”

Part of the suspicion stemmed from highly unlikely results in some elections, including former President Joseph “Erap” Estrada losing in his own San Juan City in the presidential election of 2013, and the regularity of a 60-30-10 percentage outcome among majority, minority, and independent senatorial candidates in many towns and cities in 2013.

But a great deal of the problem was caused by the failure of the Commission on Elections to carry out safeguards provided in the automation law. Former Senator Richard Gordon, principal author of Republic Act 8436 authorizing the holding of automated elections, expressed fears the other day that unless the Comelec complies with the safeguards in the law, the election results next year will be as questionable as before.

In the 2010 and 2013 elections, Gordon said, the Comelec did not conduct a review of the source code, nor did it open it to political parties and other interested groups. It did not enforce the digital signature requirement. It did not comply with other safeguards, such as the conduct of random manual audits. Meantime, the company Smartmatic, which provided the PCOS machines, somehow managed to win all contracts for additional machines.

It is in the light of these complaints that we welcome the announcement that the Comelec, under its new chairman, Andres Bautista, will hold this early a review of the source code for the 2016 elections. This will be held at De La Salle University on Taft Ave., Manila. The review will include the election management system, the consolidation and canvassing system, and the counting machines themselves. The base code review on October 1 will start a seven-month process which will be capped by the customized review in February.

The Comelec has rejected proposals for a hybrid system of manual counting coupled with automated transmission of results, principally because the law calls for automated elections. There has also been some resistance from some teachers manning the precincts, who must spend many hours for a manual count and fear the danger posed by some politicians and their henchmen.

In view of these circumstances, the 2016 elections will be automated as in 2010 and in 2013, and PCOS machines will be used. But the holding of a review of the whole election process, to be hosted by De La Salle University, will help a great deal in allaying the fears and suspicions of many. It will help ensure that the presidential elections of 2016 will truly reflect the will of the people.