August 21, 2000, Philippine Daily Inquirer, Comelec dragging feet on computerized polls, by Amando Doronila,

August 21, 2000, Philippine Daily Inquirer, Comelec dragging feet on computerized polls, by Amando Doronila,

THE COMMISSION on Elections is sitting on a time bomb in the run-up to the May 2001 mid-term elections. It is dragging its feet on the automation of the counting of election results. 

The counting process, after the vote had been cast, has been demonstrated as a source of "dagdag-bawas" (vote padding and shaving) fraud in previous elections, changing the results of the rankings of at least three senatorial candidates at the bottom end of the magic eight. 

Automation is considered by civil society groups as a means to minimize altering election tallies in the course of transmitting them from precincts to higher levels of canvassers. But the Comelec puts priority on cleaning up the poll registry list first before full automation takes place. This priority is raising concerns among civil society groups, including the National Movement for Free Elections (Namfrel), that cheating in 2001 could spell trouble for the Estrada administration, which faces a vote of confidence in the middle of its six-year term. 

The present system of counting results has opened vast opportunities for cheating because it is too complex and tedious. It has been demonstrated in other democratic electoral systems that automation, i.e., using machines rather than human hands in the counting and transmission of results, reduces opportunities for cheating because of less human intervention. 

An election result that is perceived by the public to be the product of cheating would erode the administration's legitimacy and impair its capacity to govern, thereby reducing it into a lame-duck government. 

It could also encourage extralegal or extra-constitutional moves to depose the Estrada administration that is now heavily criticized for abetting corruption and cronyism, for erratic and incoherent governance, for weak direction, and for poor economic management. 

Although President Estrada's tenure is not at stake in the 2001 polls, his continuing control of Congress is critical for effective governance. Opposition quarters consider wresting control of Congress from Mr. Estrada's ruling LAMP coalition the key to more effective checks and balances on executive powers and to impeachment action against the President. 

While Mr. Estrada has a stake in the outcome of the congressional election because keeping control of Congress serves his interest, it is unlikely that he can control cheating at the district level. 

Thus, centralized cheating does not seem to be in the cards. Moreover, it is not lost on Mr. Estrada that he was elected in 1998 in what is generally accepted as an honest election, and so he is aware of the importance of clean elections as a source of legitimacy. 

The danger of cheating lies in the competition for seats in the House of Representative and the Senate. And this is where safeguards against cheating are critically needed--automation being considered an effective means of eliminating many opportunities for cheating. 

Wrong priorities

As the election countdown gets under way, the Comelec has come under increasing attack for what is seen as its wrong priorities. In response to the series of civil society meetings aroused by the low priority given by the Comelec to automation, Rep. Heherson Alvarez has introduced a resolution directing the House committee on suffrage and electoral reforms to conduct an inquiry into the status of the computerization program. 

Republic Act 8436, enacted in July 1997, authorized the Comelec to use an automated election system in the May 1998 elections and in subsequent elections, but implementation has been marked by foot-dragging. 

The Alvarez resolution points out that although the Appropriations Act of 2000 has allocated P1 billion for the automation, and the proposed budget for 2001 includes P350 million for the modernization, the Comelec has targeted only a 39 percent automation for the May 2001 elections. 

Targeted for automation are 24 provinces in Mindanao, Metro Manila, Iloilo City and Cebu with about 13.3 million voters, or less than half of the total number of voters of about 34 million. 

In a series of briefings for the press, business groups and other civil society groups, Namfrel called attention to the priority placed by the Comelec on cleaning up the voters' list at the expense of automation. 

Jose Concepcion Jr., Namfrel chair, points out that the Comelec is using P1.5 billion for its voter verification and precinct-mapping project, intended to clean up the voters' list. The project covers only one million voters--out of 34 million--for 2001. At this rate, the verification project is taking ages to complete. 

Misplaced emphasis

Concepcion says 90 percent of the voters in 2001 would come from the 1998 voters' list. The 1998 presidential election, which saw the victory of Mr. Estrada, was generally accepted as fair and free. Thus, Concepcion argues that the emphasis on verification is misplaced and that automation can go ahead and does not have to wait for the completion of the verification process. 

Concepcion says much of the flaws responsible for cheating are found in the counting process and not in the voters' list cleanup, the Comelec's obsession. According to Namfrel, if automation were stepped up now, nine months before the elections, there is enough money and time to implement a machine-driven system for national officials, i.e., members of Congress. 

Harriet Demetriou, Comelec chair, has agreed that automation can be done for national officials only in May 2001, provided money is available. Budget Secretary Benjamin Diokno says money is available and has suggested that Demetriou make a request. 

Diokno has told the press, in response to charges that the administration is not supportive of efforts to ensure clean elections, that the government wants to modernize the counting process but the Comelec "seemed reluctant to use the money it was given. 

Unused funds

He said P3.08 billion had been released to the Comelec since 1994 for the five-year computerization program, but it had used only P608.6 million. 

Concepcion said the P350 million allocated by Diokno for the modernization of the May 2001 election, together with the P2.37 billion in unused Comelec funds, was sufficient to buy the machines needed for the automated counting of votes for national officials. 

While the President, in his State of the Nation Address in July, expressed the wish that by 2001, computerization would have been completed, the Comelec has put obstacles on the way through its emphasis on cleaning up the voters' list. Demetriou has not shown the will to fully implement the program. 

The resistance may be traced to three factors. First, Demetriou is better as a judge than as an administrator. 

Second, she has allowed Commissioner Luz Tancangco to call the shots on the modernization project. 

Third, the resistance is based on a doctrinal belief held by Tancangco challenging the "myth that modernization is the only solution for making Philippine election fraud-free." 

Tancangco has said that under the Estrada administration, "the myth of fraud-free computerized elections is being demystified." The demystification helps explain why she appears to be sabotaging the computerization project. Her philosophy, if one calls it as such, clashes head-on with the policy of former Comelec Chair Christian Monsod that computerization is "the" only solution to end fraud. 

But based on the experience of other election count systems, automation can eliminate fraud in reading the ballot, recording the precinct results and consolidating the municipal and provincial tallies or totals, according to Namfrel. 

Tancangco vs Namfrel

This doctrinal clash has found expression in the delaying tactics of the Comelec and the outbreak of public hostilities between Namfrel and Tancangco. While Namfrel has accused the Comelec of deliberately delaying the full implementation of automation, Tancangco, who heads the Comelec's computerization program, has warned Namfrel that "it should not dictate" on the Comelec and should "toe the line." 

She said Namfrel was accredited by the Comelec to help ensure clean elections and that the mandate of the Comelec was to give priority to having a clean database for registered voters. 

In degrading the automation program and in her public attacks on Namfrel, Tancangco has revived a quarrel with Namfrel. 

In March 1991, Tancangco, who was on the faculty of the University of the Philippines' School of Public Administration, published a provocative paper concluding that the 1987 elections were marred by "wholesale fraud" orchestrated by the Aquino administration. 

She implicated Namfrel in the alleged fraud. As viewed by experienced political observers, the accusation that Namfrel was responsible for the fraud was absurd because it was not in control of the counting process; the Comelec was. But the paper caused so much sensation that the UP administration held a symposium to assess her paper. 

The discussants included Dr. Mahar Mangahas, the late Dean Jose Encarnacion of the UP School of Economics and Prof. Mercedes Concepcion. All declared that the Tancangco report did not have a logical basis for its conclusion. The panel demolished her methodology. 

Encarnacion said, "Much of the discussion in this paper strikes me as funny (because the reasoning is so queer), and since it is not meant as a humorous piece but a serious academic study, I have to conclude that this paper is simply an incompetent treatment of the subject." 

In her tirades on Namfrel, Tancangco shows that she has an axe to grind, which seems to spill onto the Comelec's decision to downgrade the importance of automation as a means to minimize election fraud. Demetriou does not appear to be on top of things at the Comelec, meaning she would do better being returned to the judiciary.