By Prince Rodvil Pangga
Image from THEPHILBIZNEWS
The face of politics in our country has changed drastically especially during election season. Pursuant to Republic Act 9369 an act authorizing the Commission on Elections to use an automated election system in the national and local elections culminated the first full-fledged electoral system usage on May 10, 2010. Having an automated election means transitioning from a bitter and time-consuming manual electoral system to a more efficient, accurate and fraud-free system demonstrating high-tech capabilities that can improve public confidence in our electoral process.
In my humble opinion, there are (3) main parameters that an automated election must follow and these are Integrity, Accountability and Transparency. They are interrelated and cannot be otherwise. Let me deal with each item one by one.
1) Integrity, means that the values and equal opportunities are given to both citizens and other electoral stakeholders that perceives credible and fair electoral process 2) Accountability in election refers to everyone’s right with respect to the conduct of every parties involve to fair and honest election process 3) Transparency must be open to scrutiny especially when technology is involved as History has told us, even in technology fraud and corrupt practices can creep in a bureaucratic manner. Being said that, we will go back and tackle the troubled history of the automated election here in the Philippines and see what went wrong on each election season that resulted in the uncertainty of fairness and fraud-free election results.
The Multinational Venezuelan Company Smartmatic was awarded to supply the hardware and software to be used on the 2010 Automated Election even though it did not meet the minimum system requirements and qualification on automated election system required under Republic Act 8436, as amended. Experts in the Information Technology and cyber-security community pointed out that there are better Electronic Voting Machine Providers (EVM) that can cater and meet the requirements set by law. Smartmatic is not new in the Electronic Voting Machine market as it has business dealings in Europe, Asia, South America and The United States but its exposure in the International market is far from positive. In 2006 Smartmatic was involved in an election-related incident in Chicago that resulted in the U.S. Committee in Foreign Investments and an inter-agency committee led by the U.S. Department of Treasury to launch an investigation relating to election fraud as it has ties to the Venezuelan government of Hugo Chavez which has been described as a foremost meddler in foreign elections in the West and presents a potential national security risk.
2010 National Election
For almost 9 years the Philippines was run under the Arroyo Administration and within those 9 years a lot of corruption allegations and money laundering schemes surfaced, due to this the 2010 Election became a pivotal point for a fresh start. Election-related discrepancy started to show the day after Comelec announced who won the 2010 Election. During the joint congressional canvassing a major question was raised on why the servers in Batasan showed about 256 million registered voters as to Comelec`s official 50 plus million registered voters while the PICC servers registered 156 million an apparent glitch that didn’t only happen to one isolated server.
Smartmatic then replied and admitted that there was a problem with their canvasing server further fuelling the fire. Another questionable incident is Smartmatic`s decision to replace and recall 76,000 CF Cards and PCOS machines a week before the May 10 Election after the Comelec discovered errors in the reading of votes during the final testing and sealing of the PCOS machines, by changing the CF Cards without retesting and the inconsistent application of its canvasing servers this now raises the question of Smartmatic`s integrity as a VCM Provider, because we never know if the new CF cards and PCOS machines contain malicious data that can jeopardise the entire automated election system. The whole 2010 fiasco resulted to a criminal case against Smartmatic officials and Comelec on why they recall those CF cards without prior testing and properly securing the system that will be used on a national scale. This incident will plague future elections in 2013, 2016 and 2019.
2013 Midterm Election
In the 2013 midterm election the 60-30-10 voting pattern was seen on the canvassed of the senatorial race and thus another questionable situation emerged further putting a lack of transparency and honesty on the automated election process. Experts believe that it is not the voters’ decision why the pattern emerged but rather a result of a computer algorithm similar to what happened in Venezuela`s referendum in 2003, Mexico in 2015, and Brazil`s Presidential Election in 2014. Having a somewhat almost perfect balance of voters per candidate is highly unlikely especially if it mirrors other candidates’ results. But others argued that it is just a law of large numbers because data per region doesn’t align with the said pattern being questioned.
Another one would be the existence of an intermediary server aside from the Transparency server that is being used by the PPCRV and authorized recipients but they didn’t know of its existence either control of the said server until after the violation was committed and deletion of files was made at the Transparency server on the early morning after election day similar to what will happen in 2016, yet they say it’s only a cosmetic change. Modifications that have been made on the server systems might result in security breaches that could lead to manipulation of data. Transparency is a building block of democracy and is the willingness of all parties to be honest for the betterment of the country, by limiting transparency on how and why it occurs puts a big question mark if candidates are rightfully for their respected positions or just a pawn for a bigger picture of illegal acts that undermine the election process.
2016 National Election
In the evening of May 9, 2016, during the counting of votes a Venezuelan technician working for Smartmatic inserted a new command on the program of the Transparency server without the authorization of Comelec. When he was confronted he admitted the order was made by Marlon Garcia which is the Project Manager of Smartmatic, moments after the breach was made the lead of the Vice-presidential candidate Bongbong Marcos dwindled and soon after Len Robredo became the winner of the bid for the vice-presidency. Speculations rises and Comelec denies wrongdoing but a leaked video of Filipino system Engineers confronting and questioning the Venezuelan technician inside the PPCRV said otherwise. Due to this the Marcos camp lodge an electoral protest against the validity of Robredo`s win, fast-forward 2021 the Supreme Court unanimously dismissed the poll protest against Robredo. Another incident would be Smartmatic`s admission of other unofficial servers present during the election similar to what had happened in the 2013 midterm Elections. The integrity of Smartmatic was once again put to the test as Election Sabotage is a major claim in any election, as Comelec Commissioner Guanzon puts it was a breach of protocol that Smartmatic violated thus jeopardising the integrity of the election result. This further raises doubts on Smartmatic`s credibility to provide safe, secure and fraud-free election systems and further giving distrust to the Philippines electoral process.
2019 Midterm Election
In the 2019 Election, Smartmatic`s name was dragged again because of President Duterte`s doubt on the election system being used from defective vote-counting machines (VCMs) to corrupted CF Cards which is again a problem since the 2010 National Election, as well as slow transmission of results to the transparency servers. The problems faced in 2019 was the same with previous elections. Factors like this make you question how we truly evaluate government bidding and contract awards as well as the integrity of our election process.
RA 9369 clearly stipulates 4 major security features to safeguard the automated election system yet these failsafe measures weren’t followed properly by both Comelec and Smartmatic and by doing so they disregarded the law in the name of convenience and time sacrificing security and integrity of the election.
The role of Comelec is to remove all doubts and all suspicions as a government agency that preserves the sanctity of the Philippines’ election process, they should be beyond suspicion as to any move they do, anything they say can trigger a domino effect tantamount to them neglecting their duty.
Sadly Comelec has been too one-sided towards vendors since the 2010 Election it’s like they are a hostage of a contract and it’s very unfortunate for the Filipino people that we have this type of government agency that is supposed to be the watchdog of our democracy but instead compromise their principles, their values, and their position to be independent If I may add it’s an act of treason in which they are like traitors to the democracy we care about, you have betrayed your country`s loyalty to give an honest fraud-free election, you have betrayed your country`s trust on who should lead our nation, and you have betrayed the very essence of a fraud-free electoral process.
In the coming 2022 Election, we will once again use Smartmatic as the systems provider with its myriad of problems hunting it ever since it took the job. Only time will tell when will they replace, but one thing is for certain as Filipinos we need to vote wisely and choose rightful public servants that can defend our democracy and defend our freedom and sovereignty as an Independent State.
About the author:
Editor’s Note: Prince Rodvil Pangga is Co-Convenor of Stop Corruption Philippines Youth Movement, an adjunct group of Stop Corruption Philippines founded in 2013. He is currently taking up Bachelor of Arts in International Studies at the University of the East (UE) and looks forward to joining the diplomatic corps. He has a strong interest in solving global issues using diplomatic discourse and proper negotiations.
