In a democracy, which the Philippines is, leaders are chosen through elections.
Elections must reflect the will of the people. A rigged election, like what happened in 2004, is an assault on democracy and a crime against the Filipino people. Gloria Arroyo and her cohorts must be made to answer some day.
It is for our concern for democracy in this country that we want to make sure that the will of the people is reflected in the 2010 elections. It is our outrage over what happened in the 2004 elections that we raise questions about how the Commission on Elections would conduct the first nationwide automated elections in 2010.
Last Monday, Yvonne Chua of VERA Files wrote about the questions raised by Prof. Pablo Manalastas, a faculty member of the Ateneo de Manila University’s Computer Science Department and lecturer at the University of the Philippines, about the 2010 elections.
Chua said: “Manaslatas laid out the possible scenarios: What if the two special felt-tip pens allotted per precinct dry up before voting ends and voters have nothing to write their choices with? What if the counting machine gets jammed when ballots are being fed to it? What if the local GPRS connection is bad and slows the transmission of the results from the precincts to the municipal or city canvassers? Or what if someone snatches the laptop computer at the canvassing center?”
James Jimenez, Comelec spokesperson, in his blog replied: “Seriously? Felt-tip pens running dry are gonna muck up the elections? It seems to me unfortunate that Dr. Manalastas thinks that the Comelec is so benighted that we would willingly let the election be hostaged to dried up magic markers.
“He then asks, what about jammed counting machines? The Comelec’s continuity plan, presented to the Senate and the Supreme Court, features a machine replacement protocol that calls for the defective or malfunctioning PCOS to be replaced within two hours from the time the decision to replace the unit was made.
“Bad GPRS connection? Again, the Comelec’s deployment plan provides for redundancies such that if one mode of transmission fails an alternate mode kicks in. In any case, signal strength fluctuates, yes? It is highly possible that the poor signal you’re cussing out now will pick up in a few minutes, so this isn’t really a major cause of concern. And as for a laptop being snatched from the canvassing center … a canvassing center is more secure than a bank, what with the press of human bodies all eager to witness the canvassing. And anyway, in the unlikely event that something of the sort does happen, Dr. Manalastas forgets that there is a back-up set of data – whether they be election returns or municipal or provincial reports – in the Comelec central server and the servers of the citizen’s arm, the dominant majority and minority, the KBP, and on the public website. Snatching the canvassing laptops only delays the process. It. is. not. fatal.”
Chua also wrote: “But these scenarios aren’t as worrisome as what else could happen: The whole system could be rigged, and all computers–from those at the precincts all the way to those at the Commission on Elections and Congress that will canvass the results for the senatorial and presidential elections–could be pre-programmed to make certain candidates win.
“How could this happen? The Precinct Count Optical Scan (PCOS) machines could arrive at the precincts with prepared ballot images and election results already inputted into the system, and the computers for canvassing with prepared Certificates of Canvass (COC) and Statements of Votes (SOVs). And at any stage of the elections, someone who has the root password could log into the system from a remote site and control the canvassing computers–and the canvassers wouldn’t even know. This could happen as early as municipal canvassing because the computer will stay connected to the network for 24 to 72 hours via modem starting at 6 p.m. of election day.”
Jimenez’ reply: “In brief, Dr. Manalastas posits that: first, the PCOS might arrive at the polling places pre-loaded with results – kinda like a new Mac; and second, that someone can log into the canvassing computers and monkey with the results.
“As to the first, Dr. Manalastas forgets that Comelec procedure calls for the run-through of the system very close to election day during which it will be demonstrated that the machines have nothing pre-loaded in them. The machines are then physically sealed and kept under 24-hour guard to make sure that no one gets the opportunity to do anything with them. Then, on election day itself, the PCOS will be made to print out an initialization report – again to prove that there are no pre-loaded results in them.
“As to the second, Dr. Manalastas posits that someone can remotely control the canvassing system, effectively possessing the things and, I don’t know, making them spit out funky numbers or something. Fortunately, this is highly unlikely.
“The building blocks of election results are the election returns. Those come from the precincts. The canvassing centers only add up the election returns. Very simple maths.
“Now, if some remote controller did exist and if he did get access to the canvassing computers, all he can really do is funk up the way the addition is being done at that level. He can’t do anything to the election returns. Why? Because the PCOS won’t be connected to the network except for the two-minutes it takes to transmit election results to the municipal canvassing center, the provincial canvassing center, the Comelec central back-up server, the servers of the … you know the drill.”
Jimenez is doing a great job trying to make the people believe again in the Comelec. But to the people, it’s still to see is to believe.
Press release from CenterLaw Philippines:
Petitioners call NCC’s amicus brief a hack job, asks SC to turn it down
Petitioners in the landmark suit filed with the Supreme Court to nullify a P7B project to automate the 2010 elections asked the High Court yesterday to expunge from the records of the case an unsolicited memorandum submitted by National Computer Center Director General Angelo Timoteo M.Diaz de Rivera, calling his amicus curiae submission “biased” and a “hack job.”
This came after they discovered that a certain Mr. Edgar Zorilla, Vice President for Special Operations of Respondent Smartmatic International Corp., sits as a consultant to the NCC – fact that may well have placed the government agency in a “conflict of interest.”
“The Memorandum Director General Diaz de Rivera filed is thus not only unsolicited but above all suspect,” they said in their nine-page motion filed today.
Director General Diaz de Rivera filed with the Supreme Court an unsolicited 30-page Memorandum with an accompanying electronic copy in a compact disc. In his memorandum, he asked the High Court to dismiss the petition to nullify the controversial contract.
But the petitioners said that section 36 of Rule 138 of the Revised Rules of Court lays down two qualifications for an Amicus Curiae – that is, that he or she must both be “experienced” and “impartial.”
“While the Rules principally govern the admission of lawyers to court proceedings as amici curiae, it does in any way exempt non-lawyers from the requirement of impartiality,” the Petitioners said. “The same expectation in fact applies to an expert or resource person asked by the Court to stand as a friend of court in proceedings before it, for the purposes of shedding light on difficult issues of law and fact presented before it.”
Director General Diaz de Rivera, an industrial engineer by training, was appointed by the Court as one of three amici curiae ( friends of court) for the oral arguments it held in the case last July 29, 2009.
The court directed friends of court to submit their respective comments on the Petition before the oral arguments.
The Petitioners said Director General Diaz de Rivera’s bias for Smarmatic became more evident when he submitted a Memorandum dated August 13, 2009 to the Supreme Court, even if the Court did not require it from him. Only the parties to the petition were asked by the High Court to submit their respective Memoranda following the oral arguments.
The Petitioners said it is highly anomalous that the NCC Director General consented to his appointment as an amicus curiae when the Comelec had delegated to the Commission on Information Technology and Communication (CITC), through the NCC, the task of overseeing the public bidding for the automation of the 2010 elections.
The CITC is the government agency that has immediate control and supervision over the NCC. It as also heads, through the CITC chairperson, the Comelec Advisory Council (CAC) an inter-agency advisory created by virtue of Republic Act No. 9369, with the task to recommend the most appropriate, secure, applicable and cost-effective technology to be applied in the automated election system to the Comelec.
The CAC, which is a non-voting member of the Comelec’s Special Bids and Awards committee (SBAC), recommended that the contract be awarded to Smartmatic and its Filipino partner Total Information Management (TIM).
At the very least, it is highly improper for the NCC to engage the services of Smartmatic while the bidding for the automation of the May 2010 elections is being held, the petitioners said, noting that the NCC was tapped by Comelec to supervise the bidding for the automation project where Smarmatic itself is one of the bidders.
“In fact, that some hackles may be raised because of this should not surprise anyone,” they said, “considering that the Smartmatic-TIM joint venture eventually emerged as the winning bidder and the NCC is, for all intents and purposes, a member of the CAC through its mother agency, the CITC, the law-mandated chair of the said advisory council to the Comelec.”
The petitioners said the “impropriety of it all” was exacerbated when Director General Diaz de Rivera went the “the extra mile” to push the Supreme Court to dismiss the Petition against Smartmatic and TIM, submitting a memorandum when he was not even asked by the High Court to do so.
A rigged election, like what happened in 2004, is an assault on democracy and a crime against the Filipino people. Gloria Arroyo and her cohorts must be made to answer some day.
The elections will be rigged — machines or no machines — for as long as the Macapagal clan are up and standing.
I bet that as we speak, Lozano is already preparing hundreds protest action suits on behalf of the Macapagal mafia clan in case, for some obscure twist of fate, Macapagal loonies in Congress get defeated in their future bids.
And of course Garci and other election cheating operatives are already studying ways and means to beat the election machine.
As to But to the people, it’s still to see is to believe., Had Garci been put in prison for his crime, that would have been truly a good case of to see is to believe.
Comelec is a useless institution. Sirang-sira na. It should be abolished as a matter of fact. Its functions can be absorbed by some home affairs bureau if they have such in the Philippines.
Pinagkakakuwartahan lang iyan ng mga kurakot sa totoo lang. It is graft and corruption per se.
Kawawang bansa! Ano kayang klase ang mga naging founding fathers ng Pilipinas? I wonder!
Granting than the automation works as intended, the election can be rigged a thousand and one other ways…votes can be bought, voters can be intimidated, machine operators can also be influenced, bought or threatened to still make the machines work as intended by the Cheaters, or worse if there are still the Garcis and the BedolS pretending to be the Watchdogs of the Clean and Democratic Process of the Electoral Process, the COMELEC..
You can have the best machines, the best programs and the best safeguards installed into them yet that will not be an assurance of a clean election. As long as there are candidates who are out to win by hook or by crook, at any cost and at any price, as long as there are “comollect” officers who put a price on every ballot, and as long as there are voters who sell their votes for a measly amount, clean and honest elections will just be a pipe dream.
As long as gloria is in malakanyang, we can NEVER expect an honest and clean election. Be it manual or computerized.
The woman with a forked tongue and pickled brain will do anything to win the election favorable to her dogs to save her neck from the gallows. She’ll feed everyone she knows shall protect her from prosecution once she’s out of power.
That’s how determined she is. Ang kanyang dalawang anak pa. ‘Yung asawa, bayaw, hipag at mga alagang aso. As long as its their survival that’s at stake, kahit magkawindang windang ang Pilipinas, wala silang pakialam!
Dapat may gawin tayo para mawala na yang mga peste na iyan sa Malacañang at matigil na iyang pagmamaliit nila sa atin….
“Making sure 2010 elections work”
How, how the carabao kaya with the KOMOLEK we have?!
Si pinoy ay walang gagawin sa eleksyon day kundi magbantay sa dayaan na mahirap maimprenta ng mata dahil parang kidlat ang mangyayaring Hello Garci. Well, pwedeng kunan ang evidence ng mga may video at cellphone cameras, paano yung mga nasa liblib na baryo lalo na sa Mindanao na can’t afford to have the gadgets?
In manual voting, you can gather evidences through paper trail in each voting districts, you can visually see it and recorded by cameras. The problem with the current computerized tallying of votes is there is no paper trail. The computerized cheating is being manufactured by the computer source code which is hidden from the public. So, video or cellphone cameras are wa epek in computerized cheating, regardless of your location throughout the archipelago. No paper trail equals no evidence of cheating, hence, gloria’s secret annointed wins.
Just look at the computerized voting in Iran. The opposition in Iran could not give any hard evidence or strong evidence. Why? There is no paper trail. Ahmanadinejad cheated the people of Iran twice already through computerized cheating. It worked very well, no paper trail, no evidence.
The best thing that a real opposition can do to neutralize this computerized cheating is to hire computer experts who has experiences in computerized cheating in other countries. Hire local experts too. I am sure, some Smartmatic employees have conscience too, maybe, the real opposition can get some inside information from them.
Ganun ba? No can do pala si pinoy kahit anong bantay.
Ganun ba? No can do pala si pinoy kahit anong bantay.
wala nga, tayong mga pinoy ay isinilang para gaguhin ng kapampangan. ang mga batas natin ay very flexible puede ma-interpret sa kahit anong angulo na gusto ng nasa namumuno na nakaw din naman. no choice tayo kundi magtiis lang ng magtiis. masahol pa tayo sa komunista kaya nga ayaw ng muslim na magpasakop sa pilipinas eh.
Ganun ba? No can do pala si pinoy kahit anong bantay.
YES Igan Chi, posibleng mangyari ang iniisip ng maraming Pinoy sapagka’t ang OS at application program na gagamitin dito e ONLY Smartmatic & their counter part ang may access…BUT, if some hackers penetrated this system disgrasya na…FAILURE of ELECTION ang resulta?
Mahirap magtiwala sa COMELEC or any regime’s attack doggies…pag ang pera ang kumilos tapos ang ating lahi. Maghabol tayo sa tambol-mayon…e wala tayong aasahan sa Korte SupreGma.
Sinabi mo pa, Chi. Walang magagawa ang mga pilipino kundi nila bubuwagin ang COMELEC na imbes na tagabantay ng boto ay iyan mismo ang puno’t dulo ng dayaan. Mismong mekanismo ng dayaan nasa COMELEC. Palusot pa iyong ipinasusunog ang mga ebidensiya.
It’s a useless agency. It should be abolished!!!
You’re right, xman. The sad reality is, in the elections where automation was employed, the complaints of wholesale cheating cannot be substantiated. Like in Iran and Venezuela, the computed probabilities makes it impossible to achieve the outcomes as they were but the complainants are left with nothing to prove their claim.