Under the automation law, before the automated election system can be used in an electoral exercise, it has to undergo a source code review by an international certification entity that, to put it simply, checks out all the various components of the AES, to make sure it all functions as planned and that there are no malicious instructions embedded in the code. There are three of these components: the election management system (EMS), the vote counting machine, and the canvassing and consolidation system.
After the review, these components are considered “trusted.” At that point, the source codes are then assembled to create the software programs that will run the entire AES. This process is called the “build.”
This week started on a high note for the Commission on Elections with the news that the international source code review had been successfully completed, and the successful conduct of the trusted build for the EMS component of the automated election system. The Comelec has gone through this process since 2010, but what distinguished the trusted build for the 2019 elections was that the trusted build for the EMS—the first of the three components of the AES—was actually livestreamed while it was happening!
Also this week, the Comelec held a briefing for the various international election observers intending to monitor the Bangsamoro Organic Law plebiscite, scheduled for both the 21st of January and the sixth of February 2019. In case you missed the news, the Comelec had earlier decided to conduct the plebiscite on two separate days: the first for the geographical areas comprising the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, as well as Isabela City in Basilan, and Cotabato City; and the second, for the province of Lanao del Norte, except Iligan City; the municipalities of Aleosan, Carmen, Kabacan, Midsayap, Pikit and Pigkawayan in the province of North Cotabato; and all other areas contiguous to any of the Bangsamoro core areas where the local government of such area, by way of a resolution, asked for inclusion in the plebiscite; or where at least 10 percent of the registered voters in a local government unit, by way of a petition, asked for inclusion in the plebiscite.
During the briefing, the observers were updated on the status of preparations for the plebiscite—most notably that the printing of ballots has been completed. They were also given an overview of the security environment in the plebiscite areas; good news—the security briefing concluded that the Philippine National Police’s assessment was showing green across the board.
As a final note, within the community of workers involved in various aspects of elections, the consensus is that election observation is a key component of the democratic process. Outside of that circle, however, there may be some who ask: “What is it for?”
The short answer, provided by the United Nations, is that “election observation is a valuable tool for improving the quality of elections. Observers help build public confidence in the honesty of electoral processes. Observation can help promote and protect the civil and political rights of participants in elections. It can lead to the correction of errors or weak practices, even while an election process is still under way. It can deter manipulation and fraud, or expose such problems if they do occur. When observers can issue positive reports, it builds trust in the democratic process and enhances the legitimacy of the governments that emerge from elections. Election observation by domestic groups encourages civic involvement in the political process. Following elections, reports and recommendations by observer groups can lead to changes and improvements in national law and practice.”