COMMENTARY: The new Comelec appointments and the 2016 elections

The new appointments to the Comelec, namely, Chair Andres Bautista and the two other commissioners – Rowena Amelia V. Guanzon and Sherif M. Abbas - complete the line-up of the Commission for the coming 2016 elections.

Without detracting from anybody’s credentials,  the appointments mean that all seven members of the Commission will be lawyers.

The Aquino administration thus repeats what previous administrations have not done - heed the design of the Constitution that three non-lawyers be appointed because elections is not just a legal problem but also a behavioral, administrative and, above all, a management problem.

Only twice was that design given a chance to be tried. During the Estrada administration with a poor choice with unfortunate consequences. And the present Aquino Administration, when information technology expert Augusto Lagman was appointed but was not re-appointed, when he was by-passed by the Commission on Appointments, on the advise of Chair Sixto Brillantes.

What are the implications of the mess left by Brillantes and the delay in the appointments of the three new ones?

They have to hit the ground running, so to speak, on major operational decisions.  Such as the choice of the election system in the light of the Supreme Court decision annulling the negotiated contract with Smartmatic, for lack of public bidding, for the refurbishing of some 82,000 machines bought by the Comelec from Smartmatic.

The options are: (1) rebid the refurbishing which Smartmatic may win or do the refurbishing itself; (2) adopt another system like the hybrid proposal of former Commissioner Gus Lagman which can use the shading system that the voters seem to prefer (and does away with many of the rules on the appreciation of the ballot) but with a transparent public count at the precinct combined with an automated count and canvassing at the municipal/city, provincial and national levels; and (3) go back to the old manual ballot and counting system at the  precinct level but with automated canvassing.

The mess at the Comelec arose because the Brillantes Comelec ignored the advice of its own Advisory Council, the election watchdogs, the Philippine Computer Society and many election experts not to purchase the Smartmatic machines and to do a serious study of the alternatives. This was not done.  These decisions involved billions of the people’s money.

There is another pending issue – the supply of an additional 23,000 machines (similar to the Smartmatic system) where neither of the two bidders was qualified and Smartmatic protested its disqualification on a technically. If the technicality issue is decided in favor of Smartmatic then the choice of system may be foreclosed to the one used in the 2010 and 2013.

However, despite the delays, uncertainties and delayed appointments, I believe that, barring a big blunder at the Comelec head office that results in the internal hacking of the system or a massive failure of logistics, the 2016 elections can be generally credible if only for one reason --the capability and the hardiness of the Comelec people at the ground level – at the city and municipal levels -- to handle difficult situations.  

The biggest lesson new commissioners learn is this – there are many good people in the frontlines who know what to do when given the chance to do it. They also know how to improvise when systems fail or the unexpected happens.

This is, of course, a double-edged sword that can be used for the right or the wrong purposes. But my experience and instinct tell me that the field organization of the Comelec can rise to the challenge.

We must also remember that the bureaucracy tends to second guess their leaders because they have been burned many times by false reformers or by people who want to use the Comelec as a stepping stone to higher office.  Hence, the need to earn their trust and, in turn, to trust and support them in difficult times.

Thus, a piece of unsolicited advise to Chair Andy and his commissioners –  before listening to “experts”, please consult first the Comelec field people and get their feedback on what their communities think and what their personal experiences have been on automation,  and ask for their recommendations on the major decisions.

The Comelec has not done this and its initiative now to make the field organization a part of the decision-making will be much appreciated, with likely good results for the country. After all, on election day,  credible elections are delivered at the ground level and not at Comelec Central.    

Atty. Christian Monsod headed the Commission on Elections from 1991 to 1995. He is one of the framers of the 1987 Constitution.