Skip to content
post thumbnail

Two election monitoring groups dispute Comelec’s claim of ‘success’ in May 10 polls

BY ELLEN TORDESILLAS DESPITE a 75 percent turnout of voters and  80 percent of results known within 48 hours, the Center for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG)  and Halalang Marangal cautioned the public against claims of “success’ by the Commission on Elections. CenPEG’s director for policy studies, Bobby Tuazon, said the  Comelec  should  address  the

By verafiles

May 14, 2010

-minute read

Share This Article

:

BY ELLEN TORDESILLAS

DESPITE a 75 percent turnout of voters and  80 percent of results known within 48 hours, the Center for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG)  and Halalang Marangal cautioned the public against claims of “success’ by the Commission on Elections.

CenPEG’s director for policy studies, Bobby Tuazon, said the  Comelec  should  address  the following concerns:

First, election results were being publicized right after polls closed last May 10 but reports from the provinces, including those filed by CenPEG’s field researchers, showed a significant number of transmission failures or delays in many provinces such as in the Cordillera, Abra, Ilocos region, Masbate, Samar, and parts of Mindanao this morning. There is no basis for publicizing national election results when votes from the provinces remained un-transmitted and incomplete, Tuazon said.

Second, the claim of automation success should be based also on the turnout of voters and the number of electorate who were able to vote. Definitely Comelec’s pre-election forecast of 85 percent turnout is now overridden by reports indicating a turnout of about 70 percent with the number of actual voters significantly lower, Tuazon said. CenPEG’s initial reports show that a big number of voters were disenfranchised for varied reasons, he added. “Automation was supposed to make voting easier and to accommodate all voters but the election day scenarios proved otherwise,” he said.

Third, why were UV scanners not used in many clustered precincts all over the country on May 10 when these were supposed to be part of Comelec’s continuity plan to check the authenticity of ballots? Why has Comelec not revealed up to now whether it was able to conduct final testing and sealing (FTS) activities prior to the voting on account of its failed May 3 FTS operations?

Fourth, the accuracy and integrity of the election results need to be established convincingly by Comelec. Considering that the poll automation overlooked many legal procedures, requirements, and safeguards including the source code review, voter’s verification feature, the generation of secret keys solely by the BEIs, and other lapses are compelling grounds for the poll body to establish public confidence in the May 10 results. “A process that is inherently flawed, is infirmed, and compromised cannot make the election results accurate let alone credible,” Tuazon said.

Halalang Marangal , on the other hand, said, “People want a successful election so badly, that it is easy to get carried away by flood of incoming election returns. Many want to believe that a clean and speedy election has finally happened, at last. But let not the public euphoria at the speed of counting erase the persistent concerns about the process.”

Halalang Marangal said the Comelec and local election authorities should not be in a hurry to declare the elections a success and to proclaim winners, especially in close contests.

Get VERAfied

Receive fresh perspectives and explainers in your inbox every Tuesday and Friday.