Building the House of Electoral Reforms for 2010 and Beyond

By Rene V. Sarmiento
COMELEC Commissioner

Introduction

Fifty years ago today, the Roman Catholics all over the world saw the ascendancy to the Papacy of Angelo Guiseppi Roncalli who took the name John XXIII. Guided by the spirit-filled passion for reform and modernization, “aggiornamento,” this servant leader summoned the largest church council in history called Vatican II that started the most far-reaching reforms within the Catholic Church in 1,000 years.

Vatican II issued 16 documents, one of which is the “Pastoral Constitution on the Church in the Modern World” and it declares that the church exists in the world and must proclaim its message in terms the world can understand.

In addition to his accomplishment in convening Vatican II, Pope John XXIII issued an important papal encyclical, “Pacem In Terris” (Peace on Earth: On Establishing Universal Peace in Truth, Justice, Charity and Liberty). In it he said, among others, that the public authority has for its purpose the attainment of the common good which is the “sum total of those conditions of social living whereby men are enabled to achieve their own integral perfection more fully and more easily.”

If there is one public authority in our country today that has to undertake urgent electoral reforms for the common good it is the Commission on Elections (COMELEC). A 1940 creation by constitutional amendment, it was re-created in the 1973 Constitution and in the 1987 Constitution. Today, it stands as one unique Filipino institution that enjoys and exercises judicial, legislative, executive and administrative functions thereby making it a superbody.

“Aggiornamento” for the COMELEC

The present state of the Philippine elections is far from being admirable and commendable. The story of popular representation and electoral contests in the Philippines is always critiqued for its four letter Fs, namely, flaws, fraud, failures and familial dominance. A few days ago, the February 23, 2008 Philippine STAR’s editorial entitled “Snap Election” lamented the sorry state of electoral process in the country today, reciting familial dominance, little efforts to correct the flaws in the electoral system that leads to vote-rigging scandal, ballot boxes snatching and ballots switching, uncleaned voters’ lists, manual and agonizingly protracted vote count, and murder of political leaders.

What to do?

In his paper, “Empowering People to Build a Just Peace in the Asia Pacific,” Prof. Ed. Garcia, Senior Policy Advisor, International Alert and former Convenor of Amnesty International-Philippines, cited bad governance as one of the origins of most conflicts in Asia today and proposes that to deal with this evil, a house of peace must be built on four solid foundations, namely, respect for human rights, socio-economic reforms, political and constitutional reforms and security reforms.

Like the house of peace, the house of electoral reforms for 2010 must rest on four solid foundations, namely, automated election system, civic literacy and voter education, capability-building/professionalization of the COMELEC, and strengthening ties with the civil society/election stakeholders. Beyond 2010, the house of electoral reforms has to add one more foundation and that is revisiting the 1987 Constitution vis-à-vis the judicial function of the COMELEC.

Specifics

The automation of electoral process – from voting to transmission of election results – is not a picnic, a walk in the park. Many democracies in the world today took longer and suffered setbacks in its journey to election modernization. It took Brazil 19 years to reach full automation. The U.S.A. remains up to this day in search for the right election automation solution but at enormous costs to its taxpayers.

From the 2004 presidential elections, COMELEC had three years of planning period for the automation of the election system. Yet nothing significant happened considering that the new Automation Law, R.A. No. 9369, which amended R.A. No. 8436, was signed only on January 23, 2007 or four months before the May 2007 National and Local Elections. COMELEC did not modernize and automate the electoral process in 2007 except to continue the capturing of the demographic and biometrics data of both the potential and registered voters.

But with R.A. No. 9369 already in place and with regular and sound advice from the COMELEC Advisory Council composed of representatives from the Commission on Information Communications Technology (CICT), Department of Education (DepEd), Department of Science and Technology (DoST), academe, ICT professional organizations, Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting (PPCRV) and Consortium on Electoral Reforms (CER), the outlook for automated election system in the Philippines is bright. A total of nine vendors participated in the Vendor Demo from November 27-29, 2007 at CICT and on February 6, 2008, the COMELEC following the recommendation of the Advisory Council, ordered the implementation of automated election of the ARMM elections on August 11, 2008, using two different kinds of technology: Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) System and the Optical Mark Reader (OMR). DRE allows voting through a touch screen or touch pad while OMR requires voters to fill up a paper ballot which is then counted with an especially designed machine. The use of different kinds of automated election system will allow the COMELEC to determine which of the two technologies is the most suitable to the Philippines, preparatory to designing an Automated Election System for nationwide use in 2010.

The plans to test a computerized election system in the ARMM as a prelude to full poll automation in 2010 got a big boost two weeks ago when the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) released the amount of P867.3 million for the project. Eleven bidders had already secured bid documents from the COMELEC and the pre-bid conference attended by the bidders, the COMELEC and the Advisory Council was held yesterday.

However, the dysfunctional elections in the Philippines will be satisfactorily corrected if together with the automated election system, equal attention is given to voter education, capability building/professionalization of the COMELEC, and strengthening ties with the civil society/election stakeholders.

Voters education will play a significant part in raising the political consciousness of the electorate towards a responsible, democratic and sustained participation in the electoral and even governance processes. One non-governmental organization that plays a lead role in voters education is the Institute for Political and Electoral Reform (IPER). With the support of Consortium on Electoral Reforms (CER) and the United Nations Development Program, IPER has prepared a training manual entitled “Your Vote: Our Future” consisting of five (5) modules.

Capability-building/professionalization of the COMELEC will have two aspects: one, on appointment and professionalization; the other, on performance and management auditing of the COMELEC. The 2007 Electoral Reform Summit on Electoral Modernization held last December 5-7, 2007 recommended, among others, professionalization of COMELEC personnel, adopt qualification standards and return to CESO standards, set a clearer mindset to study modernization, punish cheating and cheaters within and outside COMELEC, workshops on management and planning trainings for Commissioners and Directors and formulation of qualification standards for Election Officers and Regional Directors. The putting up of an Election Management Academy similar to the Philippine Judicial Academy will go a long way in developing a competent, value-driven and committed electoral workforce.

Completing the last foundation of the house of electoral reforms is the strengthening of ties with the civil society/election stakeholders. The COMELEC is aware that alone it cannot ensure clean, honest and fair elections. It has to warmly work with civil society that swells with dedicated and bright members and volunteers in many areas like participative voters education, cleansing of voters list, making templates for common electoral violations, and establishment of a system of accreditation of party election workers and consultants.

Beyond 2010

Beyond 2010 electoral reforms will mean a determined revisitation of the 1987 Constitution. A thorough review of the process and functions of the COMELEC must be done and decide whether the judicial function be transferred to electoral courts as in Mexico.

Conclusion

The path to electoral reform in 2010 and beyond is not easy. It is via crucis. Roadblocks and obstacles will be provided by forces that care for themselves but not for the people, by those who profit immoderately from a dysfunctional electoral process. Our response to this sinful ecosystem of avarice and gluttony, power for power’s sake, is the Benedictine motto of ORA ET LABORA. We pray as if everything depended on God and we work as if everything depends on us.

Finally, in this season of Lent, let us listen anew to Pope John XXIII, a bold advocate of reform during his time. In his reflection on Lent that appeared in his book “Days of Devotion,” he wrote:

“The period of Lent stresses out before us as the most propitious time for an attempt at a spiritual renewal that may correspond to what I have been explaining to you. We must look into our own souls, count our failings, seek out the most suitable and effective ways of doing our several duties and then, having in this way refreshed our souls, go on our way more happily and more eagerly and more full of confidence.”

-------------------
Paper read during the forum “On Electoral Reform for 2010 and Beyond,” San Beda College, Alabang, February 27, 2008.