Other PCOS victims dispute Brillantes

I ran last week a rejoinder of Comelec chairman Sixto Brillantes Jr. to my report on fraud by the precinct count optical scanners (PCOS). He dared Christian leader Eddie Villanueva, one of 34 senatorial candidates in 2013, jointly to review with him the votes in three clustered precincts (CPs) in General Tinio, Nueva Ecija (Gotcha, 18 Aug. 2014).

My report was on the ruling of Judge Celso O. Baguio, Regional Trial Court Branch 34, Gapan City, Nueva Ecija in Civil Case No. 4378-13. The case was for a manual recount of Villanueva’s votes in CP 19 of Barangay Concepcion, and CPs 29 and 30 of Barangay Pias (Gotcha, 28 July 2014). Not a poll protest that may be filed only with the Senate Electoral Tribunal within 45 days of the election, the recount was to find the truth. The plaintiffs — followers of Villanueva — couldn’t believe he landed only No. 19 in the PCOS precinct tally and municipal canvass. During the campaign and on Election Day, neighbors had assured them of votes for Villanueva. (Mayor Virgilio Bote, running unopposed for a second term, also had campaigned full time solely for Villanueva.) His 36-year-old six million-strong Jesus Is Lord being the largest church of the Philippines for Jesus Movement, Bro. Eddie is a household name. He has a long-running TV show and had run in the 2004 and 2010 presidential elections, so is familiar to voters.

In sum in the three CPs Villanueva got 900 votes in the manual recount, 119 more than the PCOS’ 781 — and was No. 1.

Brillantes suspected ballot tampering in the manual recount, and threatened to sue Judge Baguio before the Supreme Court. He demanded that Villanueva review with him the images of the ballots made by the PCOS on Election Day.

Come now three more PCOS victims — senatorial bets Tingting Cojuangco and Christian Señeres, and Biliran congressional contender Glenn Chong — rebutting Brillantes point-by-point. Like Villanueva who was “PCOSed” to become No. 19 in all provinces, regardless of religious or political leanings, Cojuangco was No. 23 in all. They attribute this to the 60:30:10 vote rigging for administration, opposition, and independent candidates. Even in his Bulacan home-province where contending politicians signed a covenant of support, Villanueva incredibly was only No. 9; in Tarlac where Cojuangco was once governor, she was No. 15. Señeres, endorsed by all bishops of the 80-percent predominant Catholic voters, was only No. 31, even in his bailiwicks Southern Tagalog region, Iloilo province, and Tacloban City. An ex-congressman, Chong was trounced by 14,000 of 101,500 votes, by a newbie.

Their refutation of Brillantes follows:

*      *      *

“To discredit your report, Brillantes trumpets a Comelec ‘Answer with Motion to Dismiss. Facts narrated in Judge Baguio’s ruling negate him. The Comelec filed that answer one day after the plaintiffs moved to Declare Public Respondent in Default, precisely for failure to answer within the required period. When plaintiffs filed their Formal Offer of Evidence, consisting of ‘three Reports on Manual Counting of Votes for each of subject ballot boxes,’ these evidence ‘did not merit any comment or objection from the defendant.’ At the hearing for the Comelec to present evidence, its Provincial Election Supervisor waived the right to do so. When the court ordered the parties to file their respective memoranda, only plaintiffs complied while Comelec did not. Thus, from established facts, one discerns a common thread: utter lack of interest to defend the Comelec position. Given Brillantes’ zeal to defend the PCOS, these omissions by his sentinels in Nueva Ecija are perplexing. Plainly Mr. Bondoc was right in reporting that the Comelec local officers saw ‘no need to oppose’ — to which Brillantes objected by way of misinforming the public with his explanation.

“Second, on Brillantes’ line that the court lacks jurisdiction, every citizen has the right to redress grievances by any means within the law and Constitution. Going to court for a manual count to test just three suspected CPs on sound factual basis is the best course of action under the circumstances. Procedural technicalities should not be a convenient refuge for those seeking to defeat the truth, particularly in matters of public interest as the integrity of elections.

“Bullying Judge Baguio with threats of liability does not help advance Brillantes’ arguments. He is so quick to charge the court proceedings as unconstitutional, illegal, erroneous, and amounting to gross ignorance of the law. Yet he heads an agency that is guilty many times over of such accusations. By deliberately removing major security features of the PCOS, which were designed precisely to prevent or trace fraud, the Comelec betrayed the public interest.

“Consider the 2010 results in seven Biliran CPs (780-5006, -5008, -5011, -5012, -5017, -5018, and -4011). No one can say if the results are authentic because the Comelec disabled the digital signatures of election inspectors that the law requires. It and PCOS supplier Smartmatic have not explained why. They even misled the SC during the oral arguments in ‘Capalla vs. Comelec’ when they declared that no multiple transmissions ever occurred in the 2010 elections.

“Third, Brillantes tried to discredit the manual count and integrity of the ballots by raising the possibility of post-election tampering. But his claim is futile that discrepancies in the PCOS and manual counts could be due to failure of the shades to fall within the predetermined threshold. Shades made with a pen differ from those with markers used in the 2013 elections. The former make very fine marks per hand movement, which could make the shade most likely to fall outside of the predetermined threshold. The latter make bigger marks per hand movement as to make the shade easily fall within the predetermined threshold. So Brillantes’ explanation is hard to believe, given the huge discrepancy in the counts.

“On the prospect of post-election tampering, suffice it to say the ballots and their respective boxes were not in the custody of the plaintiffs or anyone remotely interested with the outcome of the manual recount. These were in the custody of Municipal Treasurers who happens to be the same Comelec Municipal Election Officers. Therefore, it is the Comelec through its reps at the municipal level that has easy access to the ballots and the boxes containing them.

“The experience of the Comelec and Brillantes as election lawyers in post-election tampering is unavailing. The cases they handled were instituted by defeated candidates who stood to gain most from spending huge sums to tamper with the ballots and results. The plaintiffs in this case are plain citizens who have nothing to gain personally by spending huge sums of money for ballot tampering.

“As for the security feature called ballot images, suffice it to say that when Comelec defends the PCOS, ballot images are fantastic pieces of evidence it weaves. But when the very same kind of evidence was used in the case of ‘Chong vs. Espina’ to identify the ballots cast during the illegal extension of voting, it was never accepted. So here we are treated to the spectacle of evidence available only to PCOS proponents but unavailing to those seeking to prove electoral fraud.

“Finally, the best opportunity to present defenses would have been at Judge Baguio’s hearings, not at this late stage when the decision has attained finality because of no motion for reconsideration and further appeals. Brillantes’ explanation is nothing but pure afterthought designed not to clarify but distort what was established by the RTC.

“While this case in Nueva Ecija seems isolated as Brillantes claims, it and other documented discrepancies since 2010 should be taken together and not piecemeal to show the failure of the PCOS.”

*      *      *

Catch Sapol radio show, Saturdays, 8-10 a.m., DWIZ (882-AM).

Gotcha archives on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jarius-Bondoc/1376602159218459, or The STAR website http://www.philstar.com/author/Jarius%20Bondoc/GOTCHA

E-mail: [email protected].