Enough already

After the Comelec decided to exercise its option to purchase the precinct count optical scan (PCOS) machines, the anti groups ran true to form, wasting no time beating their breasts and protesting the decision.

But then again, that’s the very typical reaction whenever someone loses, barking and growling to seek attention. So is this really surprising?

The fact is, you can’t blame Comelec for deciding to buy the PCOS machines instead of setting up another round of bidding, or heaven forbid - choosing a semi-automated system that still calls for manual voting and counting at precinct level. We don’t envy Comelec chief Sixto Brillantes - neither do we blame him for getting exasperated at the seemingly endless rounds of nitpicking.

Let’s make it clear: we don’t have that luxury-both in time and in finances. Everyone knows we only have a little over a year to prepare for the upcoming 2013 elections and we cannot waste precious time dilly-dallying or continuing the debate on the purchase of the PCOS machines. Why the persistence in making an issue out of it? The 2010 elections in general has been adjudged successful, widely considered a breakthrough in Philippine elections not only by a large majority of Filipinos but also by the international community. Budget-wise, Comelec rightfully operated on the working budget of P7 billion imposed by our legislators by reusing the PCOS machines.

You can’t expect Filipinos to go back to manual voting when it has experienced a more technologically-advanced way of voting. It’s like asking people to go back to analog phones after experiencing the many benefits of smartphones. It just doesn’t make sense. With all due respect to Senator Koko Pimentel who has made pronouncements that he could not understand the Comelec decision considering the glitches reported regarding PCOS machines during the 2010 elections, his case may have been a problem but that doesn’t necessarily mean that the 2010 elections was a national failure. All that said, Comelec assured the public that almost all the glitches that occurred in the last polls have already been corrected.

Senator Bongbong Marcos, who is not even a re-electionist in the upcoming elections, has wisely expressed support for the Comelec decision. “Considering the big difference in price for a new system compared to buying the existing PCOS machines, plus the lack of time, it would seem sensible to do as chairman Brillantes has suggested. Personally, I believe the previous election was generally accepted by the public as being credible but as Senator Santiago has stated, there is still room for improvement and I hope Smartmatic, and more importantly, the Comelec is up to the task,” he stated in his Facebook account.

He also reiterated that going back to manual voting is a definite no-no - and rightly so. “What I find dreadful is reverting to a manual system that we all know has been marred by all kinds of fraud including the use of outright ballot snatching made possible by the long period of counting. It’s during those moments of delay which at times could be a matter of weeks and even more, that the cheating occurs. The speed in the counting by an automated system is the best buffer against cheating during the counting stage.”

For the country to move forward, sore losers must altogether quit the bickering and sourgraping already! The public can see right through all these politicking, Filipinos are so much smarter than these groups take us for. We all have to move on, get on with it and prepare for a better and cleaner 2013 elections. Comelec has better things to do than sitting around enduring long-winding hearings, and praying like hell that everything moves miraculously fast so they can beat the looming deadline for the upcoming elections. Enough already - let’s get on with it!

Caloocan row

A local official has warned that a recent resolution from the Office of the Ombudsman would send a wrong signal that it is alright for any public officer to violate the Government Service Insurance (GSIS) Act.

A joint resolution issued on March 6, 2012 by ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales absolved Caloocan Mayor Enrico Echiverri, treasurer Evelina Garma, Budget officer Jesusa Garcia and city accountant Edna Centeno over failure to remit their collections due the GSIS.

In his motion for reconsideration filed last March 20, 2012, Caloocan vice mayor Edgar Erice said that aside from the patent errors of facts and law in the ruling exonerating the respondent public officials, the ombudsman violated its own rules of procedure and committed grave abuse of discretion. 

Erice stated that Section 23 (1) of Republic Act No. 6770, otherwise known as “The Ombudsman Act of 1989,” categorically mandates that administrative investigations conducted by the Office of the Ombudsman shall be in accordance with its rules of procedure and consistent with due process. Erice further pointed out that under the Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman (Rule II, Section 4 (g) and Rule III Section 6), the ombudsman may only approve or disapprove the resolution and proposed decision submitted by the investigating officer after it was reviewed by the Director of the Preliminary Investigation, Administrative and Adjudication & Review Bureau (PARB) and recommended by the deputy ombudsman.

It appears that in February 2012, Erice wrote the ombudsman inquiring as to the status of the cases he filed. He was then informed by overall deputy ombudsman Orlando Casimiro that the resolution and decision was already forwarded to the Office of the Ombudsman for her consideration.

However, Erice said that a mere cursory look at the Joint Resolution signed by Morales would disclose that it does not bear the signature of the graft investigation and prosecution officer, the PARB Director and the Over-all Deputy Ombudsman. Clearly, the joint resolution did not comply with Rule III, Section 6 of Administrative Order No. 07, Rules of Procedure of the Office of the Ombudsman, and such irregularity is undoubtedly prejudicial to his (Erice’s) rights and interest as a complainant.

In addition, Erice explained that Mary Rose Lubang, staff officer of GSIS, billing and collection department testified during the hearing held at RTC Branch 126 of Caloocan City for the petition for declaratory relief filed by Echiverri that the discrepancy in the records of the GSIS and that of Caloocan City was due to the fault of the officials of the city government. She also testified that from July 2010 to September 2011, the city government failed to remit the monthly contributions within the period allowed by law. Some remittances were made the 14 months after they were due. These delayed remittances from July 2010 to September 2011 were affirmed by Evelina Garma during her cross examination.

Erice then said that he could not elicit these testimonies before the preparation of his position paper, that is why he filed an ex parte motion for clarificatory hearing with the intention of introducing these facts before the Investigating ombudsman. Unfortunately, this was completely ignored by the ombudsman.

Erice noted that while all the pleadings and motions filed by Echiverri were mentioned in the joint resolution, his ex parte motion for clarificatory hearing was not even mentioned by the ombudsman and no explanation was given why it was not acted upon before the promulgation of the Decision on March 6, 2012. “This is clearly a violation of the cardinal principles of due process in administrative proceedings,” Erice lamented.

The vice mayor also said that the ombudsman made errors of facts in her Joint Resolution. Erice clarified that in the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed by Echiverri and GSIS, Caloocan City admitted it has unremitted premium contributions to GSIS from July 1997 to September 2011, the obligations of Caloocan City were reduced due to condonation not as a result of reconcilation, the amount of principal obligation is still the same, only the penalty and interest was reduced and the reconciliation of account would start only after three months from the signing of the MOA.

Erice further explained that his complaint is not exclusive or limited to the non-remittance of GSIS premium contributions covering the period 1997 to 1998 but covers the unpaid GSIS premium contributions of Caloocan City from July 1997 to December 2002 and from January 2007 to December 31, 2010. “The joint resolution failed to consider that to date, respondents had failed to prove that the billing of GSIS is inaccurate or erroneous,” Erice noted.

Finally, Erice said that the ombudsman committed error of law in saying that there was no evidence showing the intent of the respondents to violate the law. He explained that, “R.A. No. 8291 (GSIS Act of 1997) is a special law and any violation thereof is malum prohibitum, intent is not necessary to find probable cause against the respondents.”

“The joint resolution would send a wrong signal that it is alright for any public officer to violate the GSIS Act,” Erice concluded.

Not so hidden agenda

DDB Philippines’ top honcho Gil Chua has just shared us this good news from no less than John Zeigler, chairman and CEO of DDB Group Asia Pacific, India and Japan.

Here is the good news from John:

“Last night we were crowned Network of the Year at AdFest. Held in Pattaya, Thailand, AdFest is the most established advertising festival in Asia Pacific. This is the second year in a row that we have won this prestigious award. Combine this with being the reigning network at Spikes Asia for the past two years – we are unequivocally the most creative agency network in Asia Pacific.

“These successes don’t come easily, and we have all worked hard to get to the very top. Only five years ago, at the same show, I got scoffed at for being the leader of one of the least creative agencies in the region. Nothing like a bit of motivation to prove everyone wrong.

“Well done and thank you. An award such as this can only be achieved when all of us work together as a team. What’s most important, and you’ll notice when you see the results, is that our medals are spread across many of our markets and across many categories. This shows the breadth and depth of our network capabilities. We had best-in-show in outdoor; best-in-show in promo; medals in cyber; gold in print, gold in film… and the list goes on. Be proud. We are DDB.”

For comments, e-mail at [email protected]