14 - Roque vs. COMELEC Digest
14 - Roque vs. COMELEC Digest
14 - Roque vs. COMELEC Digest
Commission on Elections
G.R. No. 188456. September 10, 2009
FACTS:
(1) Petitioners filed a petitioner for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus with
prayer for a restraining order and/or preliminary injunction and are suing as
taxpayers and concerned citizens. They seek to nullify respondent
COMELECs award of the 2010 Elections Automation Project to the joint
venture of Total Information Management Corporation (TIM) and
Smartmatic International Corporation (Smartmatic)1 and to permanently
prohibit the Comelec, TIM and Smartmatic from signing and/or
implementing the corresponding contract-award.
(2) On Dec 22, 1997 Congress enacted RA 8346 authorizing the adoption of an
automated election system (AES) in the May 11, 1998 national and local
elections and onwards. However during 1998, 2001 and 2004, purely
manual elections were done.
(3) On Jan 23, 2007, the amendatory of RA 9369 was passed authorizing again
the COMELEC to use the AES. Sec 5 of that law authorised the COMELEC
to:
Use an automated election system or systems in the same election in different
provinces, whether paper-based or a direct recording automated election system as it
may deem appropriate and practical for the process of voting, counting of votes and
canvassing/consolidation and transmittal of results of electoral exercises: Provided,
that for the regular national and local election, which shall be held immediately after
effectivity of this Act, the AES shall be used in at least two highly urbanized cities
and two provinces each in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, to be chosen by the
Commission x x x x In succeeding regular national or local elections, the AES shall
be implemented nationwide.
(4) However, the COMELEC did not use any AES in the May 14 2007
elections.
(5) On July 19, 2009, the COMELEC and the TIM and Smartmatic (provider)
signed the contract for the automated tallying and recording of votes cast
nation-wide in the May 2010 elections.
(6) For around P7 billion, the COMELEC leased 82,200 optical scanners,
related equipment and hired ancillary services provider to be used in the
May 2010 elections.
(7) Hence this petition was filed to enjoin the signing of the Contract or its
implementation and to compel disclosure of the terms of the contract and
other agreements between the provider and its subcontractors.
(8) Petitioners sought the Contract's invalidation for non-compliance with the
requirement in Section 5 of RA 8436, as amended, mandating the partial use
of an automated election system before deploying it nationwide.
To further support their claim on the Contract's invalidity, petitioners alleged that:
(1) the optical scanners leased by the COMELEC do not satisfy the minimum
systems capabilities" under RA 8436, as amended (he was claiming that the
COMELEC must pilot test in 12 areas in the country in the national
elections of 2010, before doing fully computerized elections in the national
elections after 2010)
(2) the Provider not only failed to submit relevant documents during the
bidding but also failed to show "community of interest" among its
constituent corporations as required in Information Technology Foundation
of the Philippines v. COMELEC (Infotech).
ISSUE:
HELD:
Pilot testing
The plain wordings of Republic Act No. 9369 (that amended RA 8436)
commands that the 2010 elections shall be fully automated, and such full
automation is not conditioned on pilot testing in the May 2007 elections.
Congress merely gave COMELEC the flexibility to partially use the AES in
some parts of the country for the May 2007 elections.
Any lingering doubt on the issue of whether or not full automation of the
2010 regular elections can validly proceed without a pilot run of the
Automated Election System (AES) should be put to rest with the enactment
in March 2009 of Republic Act No. 9525, in which Congress appropriated
PhP 11.301 billion to automate the 2010 electionsthe Republic Act No.
9525 is a compelling indication that it was never Congress intent to make
the pilot testing of a particular automated election system in the 2007
elections a condition precedent to its use or award of the 2010 Automation
Project.
Joint venture
As to petitioners contention that the PCOS would infringe on the secrecy and
sanctity of the ballot because the voter would be confronted with a three feet long
ballot:
As to the issue of the possible violation of the Anti Dummy Law given that the RFP
requirement of a joint venture bidder to be at least be 60% Filipino:
And the Court held that petitioners have not shown that incorporation is part
of the pass/fail criteria used in determining eligibility
Infringement on secrecy and sanctity of the ballot and the possible violation of
the Anti-Dummy Law
The Court held that, surely, the Comelec could put up such infrastructure as
to insure that the voter can write his preference in relative privacy. And as
demonstrated during the oral arguments, the voter himself will personally
feed the ballot into the machine. A voter, if so minded to preserve the
secrecy of his ballot, will always devise a way to do so. By the same token,
one with least regard for secrecy will likewise have a way to make his vote
known.
But the Court did not see the governing relevance of EO 584. For let alone
the fact that RA 9369 is, in relation to EO 584, a subsequent enactment and,
therefore, enjoys primacy over the executive issuance, the Comelec does
fall under the category of a government-owned and controlled corporation,
an agency or a municipal corporation contemplated in the executive order.