JLC Remarks for NASSA Training (Bohol) 022010

Good morning fellow volunteers, allow me to express our appreciation for your continued faith and support for the cause of free, fair, and credible elections.

You may have read the NAMFREL statement published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer on February 10 and in the Philippine Star on February 11.

As we said in the statement, NAMFREL volunteers affirm its role and importance to be a real CITIZENS' watchdog. Our contributions to the conduct of free, fair, and credible elections, in the Philippines as well as many parts of the world, have earned us respect from past administrations, and trust from the people. Whether the Melo Comelec accredits us or not, the NAMFREL spirit is alive and Filipinos expect us to play a significant role in ensuring that the May 2010 elections will be free, fair, and credible.

It is for this reason that we in the NAMFREL National Council, together with you (CBCP-NASSA) as partners, are forging ahead with our plans to get involved in the May 2010 automated election, whether we get accredited or not.

As an update regarding NAMFREL-CBCP-NASSA's joint petition for accreditation, we filed a Motion for Reconsideration with the Comelec. If the commission does not reconsider then we will be forced to go to the Supreme Court.

While we continue to work to get accredited to be able to do certain tasks that require Comelec approval, such as the proper conduct of a random manual audit as stipulated in RA 9369, the NAMFREL National Council and volunteers also recognize the fact that there are activities that we could get involved in that do not require Comelec accreditation. These encompass the whole election process and not just the audit, nor the parallel vote count that has become the niche of NAMFREL since 1986. For those of you who have been with NAMFREL from the very start, you would recall that prior to 1986, NAMFREL was an omnipresent election watchdog that looked into the whole election process, in the process laying the blueprint that has been emulated and has given birth to election monitoring organizations not just in Asia but around the world.

Along these lines, NAMFREL-CBCP-NASSA has begun laying the groundwork for what we see as our flagship involvement in the coming election, which leads us back to the original role we have performed in 1983 when it was first engaged in the Philippine election process.

This resurgent role and task will employ data-gathering instruments and process of evaluation that use international standards of monitoring elections drawn partly from NAMFREL’s election observation and monitoring experience locally and in 32 countries for the past 26 years. This would require less manpower but emphasize better trained and qualified volunteers. Reports will be issued to the public on our observations, findings, and recommendations on critical aspects of the election process (i.e. pre-election, election day, and post-election) as well as on the performance of its key players to include the voters, COMELEC, citizens arm & other CSOs, sub-contractor, political parties and their candidates, local officials, and the media.

NAMFREL’s ASSESSMENT ON THE PREPARATIONS ON THE UPCOMING AUTOMATED ELECTIONS

As we approach the elections with 78 days remaining, we all here share the anxiety of various groups that have raised concerns on the preparedness of the COMELEC, its citizens’ partner, and its subcontractor – Smartmatic/TIM – in conducting a full automated elections.

Among NAMFRELs points of concern are:

Incessant Timeline Revisions & Missed Deliverables – timelines have been constantly revised to accommodate delays or the inability to meet deliverables such as late delivery of the PCOS machines & CCS system, printing of the ballots, education & training of BEIs, hiring & orientation of qualified IT personnel, no voters list and project of precincts yet, etc.

Queue Mismanagement - the inadequate study and preparation to manage the voters queue overflow as a result of clustering precincts. The recent mock polls while not a simulation exercise is a portent of what could occur during election day. We estimate around 200 to 250 voters per precinct may be delayed or may not be able to cast their votes due to the average completion time of between 8 to 10 minutes (IFES Study) per voter and an average participation rate of 80%. There is a big probability that voting in precincts may drag on from four to five hours past the 6pm closing time. A heavy bottleneck is also to be expected in the verification of voters.

Lack of Voters Education – The training of voters, BEIs and related election workers, has been absent, shortened and/or delayed. In a recent Pulse-Asia survey 7 out of 10 Filipinos have little or no knowledge of the new automated election process. An earlier SWS survey reflected a 40% unaware or lack of knowledge rate.

Absence of General Instructions - for the canvassing especially in the appreciation, consolidation & preparation of CoCs & SoVs from automated & manual precincts; no random manual audit guidelines yet; no electoral protest mechanism & adjudication procedure.

Lack of Comelec & Smartmatic transparency and cavalier attitude – the secrecy and duplicity in responding to accountability does not inspire trust & confidence. The most recent inaction is the silence on the results of the Technical Evaluation Committee (TEC-Sec.11 RA 9369*) findings assessing on six criteria the Comelec’’ readiness to carry out an automated elections. The same fate has beset Comelec’s AES contingency and continuity plan.

Test & Mock elections revealed flaws – Last month’s conduct of five test areas exposed transmission flaws in two out of the five machines (or a 40% error). Even a highly urbanized area such as Taguig City encountered this difficulty. Last week’s mock polls further revealed flaws in the process and highlighted a high rejection rate of ballots ie. New Era Elementary School (five out of 50 – 10%). Participating mock voters still were confused. No proper mock or actual simulation (stress) test on man & machine was conducted.