PRESS RELEASE

May 12, 2010

Center for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG)

Claims of election ‘success’ should be

qualified, UP-based think tank says
The efforts of thousands of teachers who served as poll inspectors to
pull through the May 10 elections despite the odds are heroic and
highly commendable. Indeed, the Center for People Empowerment in
Governance (CenPEG) said today, their patience and creative
intervention even without enough Comelec training prevented the
automated elections from turning into a civil disorder. This, coupled
with the millions of voters who trooped to the polls as early as 5 a.m.
to make sure they are part of the first automated elections to take
place in the country.

CenPEG’s director for policy studies, Bobby Tuazon, however,

cautioned the public against accepting hook, line and sinker
Comelec’s claim of “success” and “celebration of democracy” until
the poll body can answer the following questions:

First, election results were being publicized right after polls closed
last May 10 but reports from the provinces, including those filed by
CenPEG’s field researchers, showed a significant number of
transmission failures or delays in many provinces such as in the
Cordillera, Abra, Ilocos region, Masbate, Samar, and parts of
Mindanao this morning. There is no basis for publicizing national
election results when votes from the provinces remained un-
transmitted and incomplete, Tuazon said.

Second, the claim of automation success should be based also on the

turnout of voters and the number of electorate who were able to
vote. Definitely Comelec’s pre-election forecast of 85 percent turnout
is now overridden by reports indicating a turnout of about 70
percent with the number of actual voters significantly lower, Tuazon
said. CenPEG’s initial reports show that a big number of voters were
disenfranchised for varied reasons, he added. “Automation was
supposed to make voting easier and to accommodate all voters but
the election day scenarios proved otherwise,” he said.
Third, why were UV scanners not used in many clustered precincts
all over the country on May 10 when these were supposed to be part
of Comelec’s continuity plan to check the authenticity of ballots?
Why has Comelec not revealed up to now whether it was able to
conduct final testing and sealing (FTS) activities prior to the voting
on account of its failed May 3 FTS operations?

Fourth, the accuracy and integrity of the election results need to be

established convincingly by Comelec. Considering that the poll
automation overlooked many legal procedures, requirements, and
safeguards including the source code review, voter’s verification
feature, the generation of secret keys solely by the BEIs, and other
lapses are compelling grounds for the poll body to establish public
confidence in the May 10 results. “A process that is inherently
flawed, is infirmed, and compromised cannot make the election
results accurate let alone credible,” Tuazon said.

The fast results may be “stunning,” as claimed by many quarters, but

the integrity of such results is more critical, the CenPEG political
analyst said. “Comelec aimed to make the election fast but voters’
rights were sacrificed with many requirements disregarded,” Tuazon
said. All premature claims of “success” only tend to gloss over the
more fundamental aspects of the election, he added.

For more information, please contact:

Ms. AJ Tolentino
Project 3030 Media Research
TelFax +9299526 or +4344200
Mobile Phone 0915 5132483
www.cenpeg.org; www.eu-cenpeg.com;

For election monitor: http://eucenpeg3030.projectpeoplesweb.org and

www.aeswatch.org