2007 Elections

Speech of Christian S. Monsod, One Voice chairman, at the joint general membership meeting of the Makati Business Club, Federation of Filipino-Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry, and Management Association of the Philippines  on 8 March 2007, 12 noon, at the Dusit Nikko Hotel, Makati City)

You asked me to address four questions:
(1) What is the importance of the 2007 elections?
(2) Is there hope for the elections to be credible?
(3) What is the status of the citizen effort?
(4) How can each of us contribute to that effort?

The elections are important because for the first time since our democracy was restored in 1986, we are faced with the problem of damaged or weakened democratic institutions, of processes, i.e. electoral and justice system, or of offices or agencies such as the Senate and the House, the Office of the Ombudsman, the Commission on Elections, or even of the Constitution itself.

Most businessmen appear to be happy with the developments on the economy, but you are clearly concerned about the credibility of the 2007 elections. You are here because your concern goes beyond the successful delivery of credible elections. You care enough to know  that we must also address the broader crisis of the people?s trust in  the political system, and in democracy itself, as a means to a better  life. The repeated attempts to test the constitutional limits of executive powers, the attempt to change the Constitution for political gain, and the politics-as-usual environment of the election campaign, must concern you. All of us know the far-reaching consequences of a growing alienation and disengagement of people from democratic processes, especially the youth and the poor.

If democracy has not changed the social, economic, and political  landscape of the country, it should occur to us that maybe the problem  is not that democracy is not suitable for developing countries, but  that we have not nurtured it or are not practicing it, neither the  administration nor the opposition, but more importantly, not by civil  society itself.

It is the privilege of age to recall images that make sense of his  surroundings. Mine is the image of businessmen and the most ordinary citizens guarding ballot boxes together, with utter disregard for  their safety, with no thought of reward or benefit, protecting the ballot as if it was the most sacred blessing of their lives. Whether locking arms together or raising fists defiantly in the air, or singing the impassioned cry of the imprisoned, there was an army that was invincible for the whole world to see.

But the fact is that after we brought our nation to glory in EDSA and accomplished the first peaceful transfer of power in 27 years in 1992, we folded up our banners, we put away the t-shirts with the imaginative slogans that brought humor to the seriousness of the time, and we went back to wearing our business suits and to monitoring the stock prices of our companies or focusing on our narrow sectoral advocacies. And as we went our separate ways with our separate causes, we lost something of the dream of a nation and the significance of our interconnected lives.

Perhaps it is time to go back to our beginnings for the 2007 elections.

Every election is critical for its own reasons. If the 1986 elections, as once noted by a writer, were a test of our courage, and the 1992 and subsequent elections tests of our maturity, then the 2007 elections are surely a test of our vision for democracy.

That vision cannot include the weakening of democratic institutions that would justify what is sometimes euphemistically called a strong republic to fill the void, in which the ubiquitous presence and increasing power of the military and police in government affairs is a troubling trend. The military gambit is not new to our politics, but we thought we had addressed it permanently by the overwhelming aversion of our people to any kind of military dominance in our national life. Surely the business community remembers how the Marcos regime, propped up by the military, set back our economy by 10 years, a gap we still have not closed after 20 years.

If we are agreed that a functioning democracy is a part of our future and that credible election is its fundamental building block, the obvious question is?is there hope that the 2007 elections will be credible?

My answer is YES, if we all play our part in its making.

It seems simple enough, delivering free and fair elections. There are only three principles to observe:

(1) one-man, one-vote;
(2) allow people to freely exercise their right to vote; and
(3) count correctly what?s in the ballot.

We had thought that, by this time, we would be closer to the norm of democratic elections. But somewhere along the way, this was derailed. Automation is nine years behind the original schedule and full automation will not happen until 2013 at the earliest. The latest automation law is seriously flawed and was enacted too late to even enable pilot testing in 2007.

What of the Comelec? It is disappointing that the President has chosen not to fill the last vacancy. But we should at least be grateful that she did not fill it with somebody like Mr. Garcillano. And that the three latest appointees are persons of competence with a record of integrity who are well aware of the need to restore the credibility of the Commission and are unlikely to allow themselves to be part of any cheating. So far, the Comelec has generally been even-handed in the enforcement of the rules, but continued vigilance is obviously called for. Monitoring the resolutions and moves of the Commission is the specific mission of one of the NGOs, the Consortium for Electoral Reforms.

The pity of it is that, by and large, even when it is not in its best behavior, our democracy works, even in 2004, to the credit of the field officers of the COMELEC, if we judge the process and the results by the totality of some 17,000 positions at stake in the elections. Of course, the question of cheating in the presidential elections casts a long shadow on the entire elections. That the President really won, I believe, the elections, albeit by a much smaller margin, is not enough to mute the clamor and the campaign to finally settle the issue of legitimacy by treating the coming mid-term elections as an indirect referendum. There are those among you who would say we are past that and must move on. Maybe so, but the high distrust level of the government cannot be ignored with perceptions that, to stay in power, the government is disposed to misuse government resources (pork barrel allocations, the passing of campaign vouchers to government-owned and -controlled corporations, ?intelligence? funds), or commit wholesale fraud in canvassing , or use the military and police for partisan politics. Hence, the criticality of citizens' groups protecting the ballot and validating the process and the results of the elections.

There is one important assumption in mobilizing this effort, that the church-based groups will do within the church community what they ask of the nation?unite for a more lofty purpose. That NASSA of the CBCP, which comprise the core of volunteers especially in the provinces,  PPCRV, and Namfrel will adopt a unified approach with the least overlap and at the least cost to address the two biggest constraints to this kind of effort?(1) enough volunteers to do the job and (2) resource mobilization. The numbers are formidable. Forty-four million voters, over 250,000 precincts, and 1,600 canvassing points, which imply mobilizing over 500,000 volunteers, including some 3,500 lawyers to monitor the canvassing, and raising total resources of up to P50 
million in cash and in kind, partly by local chapters.

As of today, the only missing ingredient is the accreditation of the citizen arm for the unofficial count. Both NASSA, with an interfaith coalition, and Namfrel, which counts with over 150 multisectoral organizations, have applied for accreditation, with the final decision ironically being entrusted to the Comelec.

The good news is that, regardless of the competition for accreditation, all the groups have agreed to take substantive steps towards a unified effort by the following:

(1) NASSA and Namfrel have agreed to form a joint technical group to develop the systems that will be used by whoever gets the accreditation, which, incidentally, could be joint. This committee is already operational and has already agreed on the basic program. The objective is accuracy more than speed, where the quick count for the first two days covering some 10% of the votes will be done by the media groups and the citizen arm count will build up from the third 
day. While the target is 100% coverage, it should be noted that the highest coverage in the past in 2004 has been 83% based on precinct election returns and 97% in 1992 using certificates of canvass. Since wholesale fraud in canvassing is a serious problem now, the citizen arm count will be based solely on precinct election returns. And there will be no texting. It's the basic count from the precinct.

(2) There is already agreement on assignment of tasks, with PPCRV undertaking voter education and pollwatching. Although it is included in its manual, PPCRV has agreed not to do a count. The grassroots mobilization is to be done principally by the social action and basic ecclesial communities of NASSA. The NASSA national conference of social action directors has already taken place last weekend and the PPCRV national conference begins tomorrow. In short, mobilization has started. The focal point of organizing and counting centers will be the 85 dioceses all over the country, in coordination with other religious, evangelical, and Muslim groups in each area.

(3) A national coalition of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, law schools, NGO legal groups, association of law students, and so on has already been formed, with the Ateneo Human Rights Center as secretariat. The objective is to cover all 1,600 canvassing points, which neither government nor the opposition has been able to do all these years, with about 3,500 lawyers and paralegal volunteers. They will also provide legal services throughout the election period. This 
is a very difficult task because lawyers are in great demand during elections, probably the only time they are in demand, with huge fees. So we would appreciate if you can volunteer your legal departments to help out in this project.

(4) A master activity blueprint or menu of options for citizen involvement has been developed by the Simbahang Lingkod ng Bayan and the Pugadlawin group of Ateneo de Manila University, which we will circulate shortly after my talk for you to see. And we are also circulating all the contact persons for each of these activities for your choice. I have asked Prof. Benjie Tolosa to join us this  afternoon to answer any questions;

(5) The church groups have agreed to undertake a mobilization campaign based on a generic communications program being developed by Campaigns and Grey, Yoly Ong and her group, pro bono, that will have a unifying theme for the various campaigns of the group. All of us will be meeting on Tuesday, March 13, to review the program.

(6) Special projects have been launched, among them a Comelec Watch, as I mentioned, by the Consortium on Electoral Reforms, the Pera?t Pulitika project of the Consortium, Libertas, Transparency and Accountability Network, and the Political Science Association to  pilot-test campaign finance monitoring. We also have a nationwide candidates' fora and local covenant signing by the Simbahang Lingkod ng Bayan and PPCRV.

(7) Finally, as you already know, the Makati Business Club has agreed to help in raising contributions towards a democracy fund that will be available to all groups as soon as the unified effort is formalized.

(8) The initiative for many of these projects, I?d like to add, is being done by convenors of One Voice, Benjie Tolosa, Atty. Medina of Ateneo, Mon Casiple of CER, Atty. Guia of Libertas, Vince Lazatin of  Transparency and Accountability Network, and Bro. Javy S.J. of 
Simbahang Lingkod ng Bayan and others.

I mention these initiatives to assure you that cooperation is happening and that many people are already at work in this huge national effort. But they urgently need volunteers and funding for each of the activities, the most important of which are pollwatching, the parallel count, and the canvassing watch. Free and fair elections after all is the cumulative effect of many safeguards, and it is the  efficient and effective handling of the minutest details that can make  or unmake elections.

It is said that the mind is the athlete, the body is merely the means for us to jump higher, run faster, or lengthen our reach beyond our grasp. After each of us has thought deeply about the stake in this coming elections, after we have thought together on how to address them, let us, dare our courage to follow our thoughts. We don't have much time. The day of reckoning is barely two months away.

If democracy, according to Vaclav Havel, is the unfinished story of human aspirations, let us continue the journey in the coming elections by helping restore the trustworthiness of the election process, and on the strength of that foundation, move on to other institutions. Each of us must put down his piece in this giant jigsaw puzzle called nation-building, for only then can we say that we are truly deserving of this blessed nation.Speech of Christian S. Monsod, One Voice chairman, at the joint general membership meeting of the Makati Business Club, Federation of Filipino-Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry, and Management Association of the Philippines  on 8 March 2007, 12 noon, at the Dusit Nikko Hotel, Makati City)

You asked me to address four questions:
(1) What is the importance of the 2007 elections?
(2) Is there hope for the elections to be credible?
(3) What is the status of the citizen effort?
(4) How can each of us contribute to that effort?

The elections are important because for the first time since our democracy was restored in 1986, we are faced with the problem of damaged or weakened democratic institutions, of processes, i.e. electoral and justice system, or of offices or agencies such as the Senate and the House, the Office of the Ombudsman, the Commission on Elections, or even of the Constitution itself.

Most businessmen appear to be happy with the developments on the economy, but you are clearly concerned about the credibility of the 2007 elections. You are here because your concern goes beyond the successful delivery of credible elections. You care enough to know  that we must also address the broader crisis of the people?s trust in  the political system, and in democracy itself, as a means to a better  life. The repeated attempts to test the constitutional limits of executive powers, the attempt to change the Constitution for political gain, and the politics-as-usual environment of the election campaign, must concern you. All of us know the far-reaching consequences of a growing alienation and disengagement of people from democratic processes, especially the youth and the poor.

If democracy has not changed the social, economic, and political  landscape of the country, it should occur to us that maybe the problem  is not that democracy is not suitable for developing countries, but  that we have not nurtured it or are not practicing it, neither the  administration nor the opposition, but more importantly, not by civil  society itself.

It is the privilege of age to recall images that make sense of his  surroundings. Mine is the image of businessmen and the most ordinary citizens guarding ballot boxes together, with utter disregard for  their safety, with no thought of reward or benefit, protecting the ballot as if it was the most sacred blessing of their lives. Whether locking arms together or raising fists defiantly in the air, or singing the impassioned cry of the imprisoned, there was an army that was invincible for the whole world to see.

But the fact is that after we brought our nation to glory in EDSA and accomplished the first peaceful transfer of power in 27 years in 1992, we folded up our banners, we put away the t-shirts with the imaginative slogans that brought humor to the seriousness of the time, and we went back to wearing our business suits and to monitoring the stock prices of our companies or focusing on our narrow sectoral advocacies. And as we went our separate ways with our separate causes, we lost something of the dream of a nation and the significance of our interconnected lives.

Perhaps it is time to go back to our beginnings for the 2007 elections.

Every election is critical for its own reasons. If the 1986 elections, as once noted by a writer, were a test of our courage, and the 1992 and subsequent elections tests of our maturity, then the 2007 elections are surely a test of our vision for democracy.

That vision cannot include the weakening of democratic institutions that would justify what is sometimes euphemistically called a strong republic to fill the void, in which the ubiquitous presence and increasing power of the military and police in government affairs is a troubling trend. The military gambit is not new to our politics, but we thought we had addressed it permanently by the overwhelming aversion of our people to any kind of military dominance in our national life. Surely the business community remembers how the Marcos regime, propped up by the military, set back our economy by 10 years, a gap we still have not closed after 20 years.

If we are agreed that a functioning democracy is a part of our future and that credible election is its fundamental building block, the obvious question is?is there hope that the 2007 elections will be credible?

My answer is YES, if we all play our part in its making.

It seems simple enough, delivering free and fair elections. There are only three principles to observe:

(1) one-man, one-vote;
(2) allow people to freely exercise their right to vote; and
(3) count correctly what?s in the ballot.

We had thought that, by this time, we would be closer to the norm of democratic elections. But somewhere along the way, this was derailed. Automation is nine years behind the original schedule and full automation will not happen until 2013 at the earliest. The latest automation law is seriously flawed and was enacted too late to even enable pilot testing in 2007.

What of the Comelec? It is disappointing that the President has chosen not to fill the last vacancy. But we should at least be grateful that she did not fill it with somebody like Mr. Garcillano. And that the three latest appointees are persons of competence with a record of integrity who are well aware of the need to restore the credibility of the Commission and are unlikely to allow themselves to be part of any cheating. So far, the Comelec has generally been even-handed in the enforcement of the rules, but continued vigilance is obviously called for. Monitoring the resolutions and moves of the Commission is the specific mission of one of the NGOs, the Consortium for Electoral Reforms.

The pity of it is that, by and large, even when it is not in its best behavior, our democracy works, even in 2004, to the credit of the field officers of the COMELEC, if we judge the process and the results by the totality of some 17,000 positions at stake in the elections. Of course, the question of cheating in the presidential elections casts a long shadow on the entire elections. That the President really won, I believe, the elections, albeit by a much smaller margin, is not enough to mute the clamor and the campaign to finally settle the issue of legitimacy by treating the coming mid-term elections as an indirect referendum. There are those among you who would say we are past that and must move on. Maybe so, but the high distrust level of the government cannot be ignored with perceptions that, to stay in power, the government is disposed to misuse government resources (pork barrel allocations, the passing of campaign vouchers to government-owned and -controlled corporations, ?intelligence? funds), or commit wholesale fraud in canvassing , or use the military and police for partisan politics. Hence, the criticality of citizens' groups protecting the ballot and validating the process and the results of the elections.

There is one important assumption in mobilizing this effort, that the church-based groups will do within the church community what they ask of the nation?unite for a more lofty purpose. That NASSA of the CBCP, which comprise the core of volunteers especially in the provinces,  PPCRV, and Namfrel will adopt a unified approach with the least overlap and at the least cost to address the two biggest constraints to this kind of effort?(1) enough volunteers to do the job and (2) resource mobilization. The numbers are formidable. Forty-four million voters, over 250,000 precincts, and 1,600 canvassing points, which imply mobilizing over 500,000 volunteers, including some 3,500 lawyers to monitor the canvassing, and raising total resources of up to P50 
million in cash and in kind, partly by local chapters.

As of today, the only missing ingredient is the accreditation of the citizen arm for the unofficial count. Both NASSA, with an interfaith coalition, and Namfrel, which counts with over 150 multisectoral organizations, have applied for accreditation, with the final decision ironically being entrusted to the Comelec.

The good news is that, regardless of the competition for accreditation, all the groups have agreed to take substantive steps towards a unified effort by the following:

(1) NASSA and Namfrel have agreed to form a joint technical group to develop the systems that will be used by whoever gets the accreditation, which, incidentally, could be joint. This committee is already operational and has already agreed on the basic program. The objective is accuracy more than speed, where the quick count for the first two days covering some 10% of the votes will be done by the media groups and the citizen arm count will build up from the third 
day. While the target is 100% coverage, it should be noted that the highest coverage in the past in 2004 has been 83% based on precinct election returns and 97% in 1992 using certificates of canvass. Since wholesale fraud in canvassing is a serious problem now, the citizen arm count will be based solely on precinct election returns. And there will be no texting. It's the basic count from the precinct.

(2) There is already agreement on assignment of tasks, with PPCRV undertaking voter education and pollwatching. Although it is included in its manual, PPCRV has agreed not to do a count. The grassroots mobilization is to be done principally by the social action and basic ecclesial communities of NASSA. The NASSA national conference of social action directors has already taken place last weekend and the PPCRV national conference begins tomorrow. In short, mobilization has started. The focal point of organizing and counting centers will be the 85 dioceses all over the country, in coordination with other religious, evangelical, and Muslim groups in each area.

(3) A national coalition of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, law schools, NGO legal groups, association of law students, and so on has already been formed, with the Ateneo Human Rights Center as secretariat. The objective is to cover all 1,600 canvassing points, which neither government nor the opposition has been able to do all these years, with about 3,500 lawyers and paralegal volunteers. They will also provide legal services throughout the election period. This 
is a very difficult task because lawyers are in great demand during elections, probably the only time they are in demand, with huge fees. So we would appreciate if you can volunteer your legal departments to help out in this project.

(4) A master activity blueprint or menu of options for citizen involvement has been developed by the Simbahang Lingkod ng Bayan and the Pugadlawin group of Ateneo de Manila University, which we will circulate shortly after my talk for you to see. And we are also circulating all the contact persons for each of these activities for your choice. I have asked Prof. Benjie Tolosa to join us this  afternoon to answer any questions;

(5) The church groups have agreed to undertake a mobilization campaign based on a generic communications program being developed by Campaigns and Grey, Yoly Ong and her group, pro bono, that will have a unifying theme for the various campaigns of the group. All of us will be meeting on Tuesday, March 13, to review the program.

(6) Special projects have been launched, among them a Comelec Watch, as I mentioned, by the Consortium on Electoral Reforms, the Pera?t Pulitika project of the Consortium, Libertas, Transparency and Accountability Network, and the Political Science Association to  pilot-test campaign finance monitoring. We also have a nationwide candidates' fora and local covenant signing by the Simbahang Lingkod ng Bayan and PPCRV.

(7) Finally, as you already know, the Makati Business Club has agreed to help in raising contributions towards a democracy fund that will be available to all groups as soon as the unified effort is formalized.

(8) The initiative for many of these projects, I?d like to add, is being done by convenors of One Voice, Benjie Tolosa, Atty. Medina of Ateneo, Mon Casiple of CER, Atty. Guia of Libertas, Vince Lazatin of  Transparency and Accountability Network, and Bro. Javy S.J. of 
Simbahang Lingkod ng Bayan and others.

I mention these initiatives to assure you that cooperation is happening and that many people are already at work in this huge national effort. But they urgently need volunteers and funding for each of the activities, the most important of which are pollwatching, the parallel count, and the canvassing watch. Free and fair elections after all is the cumulative effect of many safeguards, and it is the  efficient and effective handling of the minutest details that can make  or unmake elections.

It is said that the mind is the athlete, the body is merely the means for us to jump higher, run faster, or lengthen our reach beyond our grasp. After each of us has thought deeply about the stake in this coming elections, after we have thought together on how to address them, let us, dare our courage to follow our thoughts. We don't have much time. The day of reckoning is barely two months away.

If democracy, according to Vaclav Havel, is the unfinished story of human aspirations, let us continue the journey in the coming elections by helping restore the trustworthiness of the election process, and on the strength of that foundation, move on to other institutions. Each of us must put down his piece in this giant jigsaw puzzle called nation-building, for only then can we say that we are truly deserving of this blessed nation.