The House of Representatives investigating allegations of fraud in the May 10, 2010 elections after sitting multiple times seeks to absolve automation contractor Smartmatic and focuses on the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) as responsible for the election.
Congressman Locsin rejected the appeal of “defeated” Quezon City mayoral candidate Annie Rosa Susano to be allowed to verify the contents of a compact flash card using an optical scan counting machine, precinct count optical scan (PCOS).
“A few days after the election, four CF cards were found in a junkyard in Cagayan de Oro City. The CF cards turned out to be genuine and contained all the transmitted data.”
After intense days of questioning those involved and personal animosities temper flared by the multiple failures and denials about them. The lack of technical knowledge makes the senators doubt in their rulings and try to focus on the electoral elements they know.
Many antecedents were denounced since the beginning of the tests in the electoral event, “voting machines rejected ballots and could not connect to cell phone networks to transmit the results”.
The Commission on Elections for the Philippine elections has removed more than 76,000 precinct count optical scan (PCOS) machines after finding, just six days before the presidential election, that they could not accurately read and print the ballot.
“The Commission on Elections (COMELEC) has halted the shipment of the precinct count optical scan (PCOS) machines until the problem is fixed,” he said. “As of now, we are assuming that all the machines are damaged,” said COMELEC spokesman James Jimenez, adding that engineers have traced the problem to the configuration of the memory cards containing the machines.
Cesar Flores, the president of Smartmatic in Asia, the company supplying the machines, assured that there was time to fix the problem. “It is a logistical challenge to replace these memory cards, but it can and will be done,” he told europapress.es.
Locsin Questions Smartmatic Officer, Heider Garcia
The Electoral Knowledge Network known as aceproject.org in its report submitted for the Jaime V. Ongpin Foundation on the first automated elections in the country describes the auditability concerns of the voting system.
The opinions of election experts and professionals The following are excerpts from their assessments, as well as those of others who were deeply involved in the elections:
“Nationally, our assessment is one of mixed success. Automation has not shown any substantial advantage. At the local level, our assessment is one of deep unease.” …. “Automated elections are the least transparent. … “Before the next automated elections, all loopholes in the PCOS and the automated election process should be firmly plugged.” … “Failing that, there should be a return to manual elections with increased oversight by organizations such as the PPCRV and the Chairman of the Electoral Reform Committee NAMFREL).”
“…the Electoral Commission’s claim that the automated elections were a “success” (is) a farce…. the flawed automated electoral system …was not only vulnerable to various glitches and management failures, but was also conducive to electronic cheating, including the possible preloading of election results.” (Cenpeg)
“Despite the results of the May 2010 elections with respect to the National Elections … not all local election results could be reliable to the same extent…. the automated electoral system is in serious need of revision and corrective measures.” (Namfrel)
Source:
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEnV6TtM2sg&t=1s
2. https://www.philstar.com/locsin-ready-clear-smartmatic/amp/
3. https://aceproject.org/ero-en/regions/asia/PH/philippines-the-2010
4. https://www.csmonitor.com/Philippines-election-Doubts
5. https://www.csmonitor.com/What-to-watch-for-in-Philippines-elections
6. https://www.europapress.es/internacional/noticia-solo-queja.html
7. https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/press_release/2010/0613_pimentel1.asp
8. https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/press_release/2010/0517_pimentel1.asp
9. https://legacy.senate.gov.ph/press_release/2010/0504_aquino3.asp
1. Does the lack of technical knowledge of the political actors allow election companies to seek absolution in cases where failures and irregularities are observed?
2. Do election companies such as Smartmatic seek to cede their legal responsibilities regarding the problems caused to the electoral bodies by indicating that they alone provide a limited service?
3. Why, if the 76,000 precinct scanners failed, did Philippine authorities not postpone the elections?
4. Were the failures and memories found an attempt of systematic fraud?
5. Were subsequent audits conducted to analyze the failure of the precinct scanners?
6. Why did Smartmatic not perform the subsequent test audits and log reviews claiming to Comelec that there were contractual provisions regarding the use of Smartmatic’s servers and software?
Comments are closed.