EDITORIAL - Another useless law

The Comelec is warning everyone against betting on the outcome of the elections. Anyone caught betting on the outcome of the elections will suffer up to six years in prison. How about betting that the Comelec cannot catch a single soul betting?

Seriously now, the Comelec has admitted in the same breath that it would be difficult to catch any offenders. In effect it is admitting that the law against betting is one more election law that the Comelec finds hard to implement.

And that brings us to the question that begs to be asked, which is: Just how many laws governing the conduct of elections are there, and then how many of them can people reasonably expect the Comelec to be able to seriously implement?

On the other hand, the built-in limitations in the Comelec that seriously impair its ability to enforce its own rules are no secret to anyone that it is a wonder why laws that are clearly not within the capacity of the Comelec to implement keep getting crafted.

For instance, this law against betting on the outcome of the elections is clearly impossible to implement even without the Comelec having to admit it. Why then did anyone ever thought it necessary to make it?

Even granting that this law against betting can be reasonably implemented, why the heck did any lawmaker find it necessary to ban such betting? What is so bad about betting on the outcome of elections that is not so bad in the other forms of betting that other laws allow?

Laws should not be ambiguous in the intent and application. If betting is bad, then it has to be bad all thoughout. There can be no two ways about it. It is ridiculous to say this kind of betting is good and then say that kind is bad.

The problem with laws that cannot be implemented properly is that, more often than not, they will be implemented improperly. Impaired ability will always result in impaired productivity and it is not the implementors who suffer but those whom laws are meant to be implemented.