Posted on 08:21 PM, June 07, 2010
Map Insights -- By Felicito C. Payumo
Now They Say We Can Do Manual Count
A day after the election results had been speedily transmitted to the Comelec server within a few hours, I received an e-mail from a daughter in the US asking me to click on "Eleksyon 2010" Web site. She found the Web site with real-time update on the elections "cool" and asked if I had changed my mind about automation. She had been reading articles on the automated election, including the proposal from a group of IT experts that Comelec conduct a 100% parallel manual count even if limited only to five positions of president, vice president, congresman, governor, and mayor.
I told her that the early public euphoria was over the quickness of the ballot count but the verdict on its accuracy is not yet out. The acceptance by the people is still tentative, and "Koala Boy" had nothing to do with it.
The losing local candidates, stunned by the swiftness of the count and too intimidated to raise questions as results at the national level coincided with the poll surveys (both pre-election and exit), had kept mum. Noynoy’s lead has generally been accepted by the people, regardless of the spin some columnists make of Koala Boy’s revelations. But lately, doubts have emerged, questions have been asked, and protests are being filed by national as well as by local candidates. I need not list the names of these candidates who assailed the "hocus PCOS" that allegedly happened with pre-programmed flash cards and tampered transmission of election results. And it did not help the credibility of Smartmatic that 60 PCOS machines were found in the house of a Smartmatic technician in Antipolo when the reason for the long queues was the clustering of precincts owing to the insufficient number of machines.
Automation speeds up the election process. But we are finding out that it is not impervious to mistakes or insulated from mischiefs.
Couldn’t we have saved ourselves the furor that we read about had Comelec acceded to a 100% parallel manual count? Now, Commissioner Larrazabal tells us we may do so, if we want. Sorry, but a manual count now will take long to complete, it will be more costly, and it will not be credible.
1. Unlike a parallel manual count conducted simultaneously across the country after the close of voting, a manual count now will have to be done sequentially. Instead of a maximum of 12 hours -- much less if only five positions will be counted -- it will take weeks to do it now. (The random audit was reported to have been only 10% completed after two weeks.)
2. Unlike a parallel manual count when the BEIs were still in place in the precincts to do the manual count for an extra day’s allowance, we will have to spend more to do the count now.
3. Unlike a parallel manual count conducted in the open before the public and watched by poll watchers, a manual count now will not be transparent. (The random manual audit is done even without representatives of the parties and poll watchdogs.) The results of the count will not be as credible.
The parallel manual count was not a call for a return to manual elections. It was meant to serve as a check to the machine count as all other proposals for technical safeguards have been disdainfully disregarded by the Comelec in these first ever automated elections. Adding to the apprehension was the seemingly impossible logistics feat that Smartmatic performed when it recalled all the compact flash cards, ordered their replacement, had them shipped from an undisclosed source, physically distributed them to the 76,000 PCOS from Aparri to Jolo, installed and supposedly tested them -- all within the short span of three days immediately before election day.
No doubt, the country was put to grave risk even if a debacle had been averted. I am happy for Chairman Melo whose illustrious career was spared from being capped by a disaster. But regardless of the outcome, the commissioners and members of the Technical Advisory Board -- if Comelec were a department in a corporation and the technical advisory board its consultants -- would all have been fired, and Smartmatic penalized and blacklisted permanently.
Now, we have to resort to the random manual audit as required by law. The law prescribes an audit of at least one PCOS machine per congressional district. Since everyone agrees that the number is woefully inadequate, Comelec agreed to audit 1,200 PCOS machines or a ratio of five PCOS per congressional district. While the aggregate number of 1,200 PCOS machines may be a sufficient sample size to confirm the outcome of election for the national candidates, it is not acceptable at the local level.
To demonstrate, let us use the First District of Bataan which has six municipalities as an example. It means an audit of only one PCOS machine for each of the five municipalities. My hometown of Dinalupihan, for instance, which was assigned 79 PCOS machines, will have only one machine audited. And the sixth municipality will not have even one machine audited. Will a local candidate accept his loss from the verdict of the grey box?
That is the question local candidates all over the country would have been spared wrestling with had the manual count been done to confirm the machine count.
The article reflects the personal opinion of the author and does not reflect the official stand of the Management Association of the Philippines. The author was a three-term representative of the First District of Bataan and former chairman and administrator of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority. He is chairman of the board of the University of Nueva Caceres. Feedback at map@globelines.com.ph. For previous articles, please visit
