TodayisFriday,July22,2016

RepublicofthePhilippines
SUPREMECOURT
Manila
ENBANC
G.R.No.188456September10,2009
H.HARRYL.ROQUE,JR.,JOELR.BUTUYAN,ROMELR.BAGARES,ALLANJONESF.LARDIZABAL,
GILBERTT.ANDRES,IMMACULADAD.GARCIA,ERLINDAT.MERCADO,FRANCISCOA.ALCUAZ,MA.
AZUCENAP.MACEDA,andALVINA.PETERS,Petitioners,
vs.
COMMISSIONONELECTIONS,RepresentedbyHON.CHAIRMANJOSEMELO,COMELECSPECIALBIDS
andAWARDSCOMMITTEE,representedbyitsCHAIRMANHON.FERDINANDRAFANAN,DEPARTMENTOF
BUDGETandMANAGEMENT,representedbyHON.ROLANDOANDAYA,TOTALINFORMATION
MANAGEMENTCORPORATIONandSMARTMATICINTERNATIONALCORPORATION,Respondents.
PETEQUIRINOQUADRA,PetitionerinIntervention.
SENATEOFTHEPHILIPPINES,representedbyitsPresident,JUANPONCEENRILE,MovantIntervenor.
DECISION
VELASCO,JR.,J.:
Inademocraticsystemofgovernment,thepeoplesvoiceissovereign.Corollarily,choosingthroughtheballots
themenandwomenwhoaretogovernthecountryisperhapsthehighestexerciseofdemocracy.Itisthusthe
interest of the state to insure honest, credible and peaceful elections, where the sanctity of the votes and the
secrecyoftheballotsaresafeguarded,wherethewilloftheelectorateisnotfrustratedorundermined.Forwhen
the popular will itself is subverted by election irregularities, then the insidious seeds of doubt are sown and the
idealofapeacefulandsmoothtransitionofpowerisplacedinjeopardy.Toautomate,thusbreakingawayfroma
manualsystemofelection,hasbeenviewedasasignificantsteptowardscleanandcredibleelections,unfettered
bythetravailsofthelongwaitandcheatingthathavemarkedmanyofourelectoralexercises.
TheCommissiononElections(Comelec),privaterespondents,theNationalComputerCenterandothercomputer
wizards are confident that nationwide automated elections can be successfully implemented. Petitioners and
some skeptics in the information technology (IT) industry have, however, their reservations, which is quite
understandable.Tothem,theautomatedelectionsystemandtheuntestedtechnologyComelechaschosenand
set in motion are pregnant with risks and could lead to a disastrous failure of elections. Comelec, they allege,
wouldnotbeuptothechallenge.Cheatingonamassivescale,butthistimefacilitatedbyamachine,isperceived
tobearealpossibility.
In this petition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus with prayer for a restraining order and/or preliminary
injunction, petitioners H. Harry L. Roque, Jr., et al., suing as taxpayers and concerned citizens, seek to nullify
respondentComelecsawardofthe2010ElectionsAutomationProject(automationproject)tothejointventureof
TotalInformationManagementCorporation(TIM)andSmartmaticInternationalCorporation(Smartmatic)1andto
permanently prohibit the Comelec, TIM and Smartmatic from signing and/or implementing the corresponding
contractaward.
ByResolution2 of July 14, 2009, the Court directed the respondents as well as the University of the Philippines
(UP) Computer Center, National Computer Center (NCC) and Information Technology Foundation of the
Philippines(Infotech,hereinafter)tosubmittheircollectiveorseparatecommentstothepetitiononorbeforeJuly
24, 2009. Before any of the comments could actually be filed, Atty. Pete QuirinoQuadra sought leave to
intervene. In another resolution, the Court allowed the intervention and admitted the corresponding petitionin
intervention.3
OnJuly29,2009,theCourtheardtheprincipalpartiesinoralargumentswhichwasfollowedbythesubmissionof
their and the resource persons instructive, albeit clashing, memoranda. The Senate, through the Senate
President,wouldlaterjointhefrayviaaMotionforLeavetoIntervene.InaResolutionofAugust25,2009,the
CourtadmittedtheSenatescommentinintervention.

Fromthepetition,theseparatecommentsthereon,withtheirrespectiveannexes,andotherpleadings,aswellas
fromadmissionsduringtheoralarguments,theCourtgathersthefollowingfacts:
OnDecember22,1997,CongressenactedRepublicActNo.(RA)8436authorizingtheadoptionofanautomated
electionsystem(AES)intheMay11,1998nationalandlocalelectionsandonwards.The1998,2001,and2004
nationalandlocalpolls,however,cameandwentbutpurelymanualelectionswerestilltheorderoftheday.On
January 23, 2007, the amendatory RA 93694 was passed authorizing anew the Comelec to use an AES. Of
particular relevance are Sections 6 and 10 of RA 9369originally Secs. 5 and 8, respectively of RA 8436, as
amendedeachdefiningComelecsspecificmandatesinsofarasautomatedelectionsareconcerned.TheAES
wasnotutilizedintheMay10,2000elections,asfundswerenotappropriatedforthatpurposebyCongressand
duetotimeconstraints.
RA 9369 calls for the creation of the Comelec Advisory Council5 (CAC). CAC is to recommend, among other
functions,themostappropriate,applicableandcosteffectivetechnologytobeappliedtotheAES.6Tobecreated
byComelectooistheTechnicalEvaluationCommittee(TEC)7whichistaskedtocertify,throughanestablished
internationalcertificationcommittee,notlaterthanthreemonthsbeforetheelections,bycategoricallystatingthat
the AES, inclusive of its hardware and software components, is operating properly and accurately based on
definedanddocumentedstandards.8
In August 2008, Comelec managed to automate the regional polls in the Autonomous Region of Muslim
Mindanao9(ARMM),usingdirectrecordingelectronics(DRE)technology10intheprovinceofMaguindanaoand
the optical mark reader/recording (OMR) system, particularly the Central Count Optical Scan (CCOS),11 in the
restofARMM.12WhatscoreshailedassuccessfulautomatedARMM2008electionspavedthewayforComelec,
with some prodding from senators,13 to prepare for a nationwide computerized run for the 2010 national/local
polls, with the many lessons learned from the ARMM experience influencing, according to the NCC, the
technologyselectionforthe2010automatedelections.14
Accordingly,inearlyMarch2009,theComelecreleasedtheRequestforProposal(RFP),alsoknownasTermsof
Reference (TOR), for the nationwide automation of the voting, counting, transmission, consolidation and
canvassingofvotesfortheMay10,2010SynchronizedNationalandLocalElections.Whatisreferredtoalsoin
theRFPandothercontractdocumentsasthe2010ElectionsAutomationProject(AutomationProject)consistsof
threeelaboratecomponents,asfollows:
Component1:PaperBasedAES.15 1A. Election Management System (EMS) 1B PrecinctCount Optic
Scan(PCOS)16Systemand1C.Consolidation/CanvassingSystem(CCS)
Component2:ProvisionforElectronicTransmissionofElectionResultsusingPublicTelecommunications
Networkand
Component3:OverallProjectManagement
Andobviouslytoaddressthepossibilityofsystemsfailure,theRFPrequiredinterestedbidderstosubmit,among
otherthings:acontinuityplan17andabackupplan.18
UnderthetwoenvelopesystemdesignedundertheRFP,19eachparticipatingbiddershallsubmit,aspartofits
bid,anEligibilityEnvelope20 that should inter alia establish the bidders eligibility to bid. On the other hand, the
secondenvelope,ortheBidEnvelopeitself,shallcontaintwoenvelopesthat,inturn,shallcontainthetechnical
proposalandthefinancialproposal,respectively.21
Subsequently, the Comelec Special Bids and Awards Committee (SBAC), earlier constituted purposely for the
aforesaid project, caused the publication in different newspapers of the Invitation to Apply for Eligibility and to
Bid22for the procurement of goods and services to be used in the automation project.23 Meanwhile, Congress
enactedRA9525appropriatingsomePhP11.3billionassupplementalbudgetfortheMay10,2010automated
nationalandlocalelections.
Of the ten (10) invitationresponding consortia which obtained the bid documents, only seven (7) submitted
sealedapplicationsforeligibilityandbids24which,perBidBulletinNo.24,weretobeopenedonapresetdate,
following the convening of the prebid conference. Under the RFP, among those eligible to participate in the
biddingaremanufacturers,suppliersand/ordistributorsformingthemselvesintoajointventure.Ajointventureis
defined as a group of two or more manufacturers, suppliers and/or distributors that intend to be jointly and
severallyresponsibleorliableforaparticularcontract.25
Among the submitted bids was that of the joint venture (JV) of TIM and Smartmatic, the former incorporated
undertheCorporationCodeofthePhilippines.Smartmatic,ontheotherhand,wasorganizedunderthelawsof

Barbados.26Forastatedamount,saidJVproposedtoundertakethewholeautomationproject,inclusiveofthe
delivery of 82,200 PCOS machines. After the conclusion of the eligibility evaluation process, only three
consortia27werefoundandthusdeclaredaseligible.Furtheron,followingtheopeningofthepassingbiddersBid
Envelopeandevaluatingthetechnicalandfinancialproposalsthereincontained,theSBAC,peritsRes.No.09
001,s.2009,declaredtheabovestatedbidoftheJVofTIMSmartmaticasthesinglecomplyingcalculatedbid.28
As required by the RFP, the bid envelope contained an outline of the joint ventures backup and continuity or
contingency plans,29 in case of a systems breakdown or any such eventuality which shall result in the delay,
obstructionornonperformanceoftheelectoralprocess.
After declaring TIMSmartmatic as the best complying bidder, the SBAC then directed the joint venture to
undertake postqualification screening, and its PCOS prototype machinesthe Smarmatic Auditable Electronic
System(SAES)1800toundergoendtoend30testingtodeterminecompliancewiththepresetcriteria.
InitsMemorandumofJune01,2009,ontheSubject:SystemsEvaluationConsolidatedReportandStatusReport
on the PostQualification Evaluation Procedures, the SBAC Technical Working Group (TWG) stated that it was
undertakinga4day(May27toMay30,2009)testevaluationofTIMandSmartmaticsproposedPCOSproject
machines. Its conclusion: "The demo systems presented PASSED all tests as required in the 26item criteria
specified in the [RFP]" with 100% accuracy rating.31 The TWG also validated the eligibility, and technical and
financialqualificationsoftheTIMSmartmaticjointventure.
On June 9, 2009, Comelec, upon the recommendation of its SBAC, the CAC and other stakeholders, issued
Resolution No. (Res.) 860832 authorizing the SBAC to issue, subject to welldefined conditions, the notice of
awardandnoticetoproceedinfavorofthewinningjointventure.
Soonafter,TIMwroteComelecexpressingitsdesiretoquittheJVpartnership.Intime,however,thepartieswere
abletopatchupwhatTIMearlierdescribedasirreconcilabledifferencesbetweenpartners.
What followed was that TIM and Smartmatic, pursuant to the Joint Venture Agreement (JVA),33 caused the
incorporation of a joint venture corporation (JVC) that would enter into a contract with the Comelec. On July 8,
2009, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued a certificate of incorporation in favor of Smartmatic TIM
Corporation. Two days after, or on July 10, 2009, Comelec and Smartmatic TIM Corporation, as provider,
executed a contract34 for the lease of goods and services under the contract for the contract amount of PhP
7,191,484,739.48, payable as the "Goods and Services are delivered and/or progress is made in accordance
[withpreset]ScheduleofPayments."35Onthesamedate,aNoticetoProceed36wassentto,andreceivedby,
SmartmaticTIMCorporation.
Meanwhile, or on July 9, 2009, petitioners interposed the instant recourse which, for all intents and purposes,
impugns the validity and seeks to nullify the July 10, 2009 ComelecSmartmaticTIM Corporation automation
contract adverted to. Among others, petitioners pray that respondents be permanently enjoined from
implementingtheautomationprojectonthesubmissionthat:
PUBLIC RESPONDENTS COMELEC AND COMELECSBAC COMMITTED GRAVE ABUSE OF
DISCRETION AMOUNTING TO LACK OR EXCESS OF JURISDICTION IN AWARDING THE 2010
ELECTIONSAUTOMATIONPROJECTTOPRIVATERESPONDENTSTIMANDSMARTMATICFOR
THEFOLLOWINGREASONS:
x x x COMELEC DID NOT CONDUCT ANY PILOT TESTING OF THE x x x PCOS MACHINES
OFFEREDBYPRIVATERESPONDENTSSMARTMATICANDTIM,INVIOLATIONOF[RA]8436(AS
AMENDEDBY[RA]9369)
THE [PCOS] MACHINES [THUS] OFFERED BY PRIVATE RESPONDENTS x x x DO NOT SATISFY
THEMINIMUMSYSTEMCAPABILITIESSETBY[RA]NO.8436(ASAMENDEDBY[RA]9369).
PRIVATE RESPONDENTS x x x DID NOT SUBMIT THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS DURING THE
BIDDING PROCESS THAT SHOULD ESTABLISH THE DUE EXISTENCE, COMPOSITION, AND
SCOPE OF THEIR JOINT VENTURE, IN VIOLATION OF THE SUPREME COURTS HOLDING IN
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, vs. COMELEC (G.R. No.
159139,Jan.13,2004).
THEREWASNOVALIDJOINTVENTUREAGREEMENT[JVA]BETWEENPRIVATERESPONDENTS
SMARTMATIC AND TIM DURING THE BIDDING, IN VIOLATION OF THE SUPREME COURTS
HOLDINGININFORMATIONTECHNOLOGYFOUNDATIONOFTHEPHILIPPINESvs.COMELECx
x x WHICH REQUIRES A JOINT VENTURE TO INCLUDE A COPY OF ITS [JVA] DURING THE
BIDDING.

THE ALLEGED JOINT VENTURE COMPOSED OF PRIVATE RESPONDENTS SMARTMATIC AND

TIM, DOES NOT SATISFY THE SUPREME COURTS DEFINITION OF A "JOINT VENTURE" IN
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY FOUNDATION OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. COMELEC x x x WHICH
"REQUIRESACOMMUNITYOFINTERESTINTHEPERFORMANCEOFTHESUBJECTMATTER."
Filedasitwasbeforecontractsigning,thepetitionunderstandablydidnotimpleadSmartmaticTIMCorporation,
doubtlessanindispensablepartytotheseproceedings,anincidentthatdidnotescapeComelecsnotice.37
Asapreliminarycounterpoint,eitherorbothpublicandprivaterespondentsquestionthelegalstandingorlocus
standi of petitioners, noting in this regard that the petition did not even raise an issue of transcendental
importance,letaloneaconstitutionalquestion.
Asanadditionalpoint,respondentsalsourgethedismissalofthepetitiononthegroundofprematurity,petitioners
having failed to avail themselves of the otherwise mandatory builtin grievance mechanism under Sec. 55 in
relationtoSec.58ofRA9184,alsoknownastheGovernmentProcurementReformAct, as shall be discussed
shortly.
PROCEDURALGROUNDS
TheCourtisnotdisposedtodismissthepetitiononproceduralgroundsadvancedbyrespondents.
LocusStandiandPrematurity
It is true, as postulated, that to have standing, one must, as a rule, establish having suffered some actual or
threatened injury as a result of the alleged illegal government conduct that the injury is fairly traceable to the
challenged action and that the injury is likely to be redressed by a favorable action.38 The prescription on
standing,however,isamatterofprocedure.Hence,itmayberelaxed,astheCourthasoftenrelaxedtherulefor
nontraditionalplaintiffs,likeordinarycitizensandtaxpayers,whenthepublicinterestsorequires,suchaswhen
the matter is of transcendental importance, of overarching significance to society, or of paramount public
interest.39 As we wrote in Chavez v. PCGG,40 where issues of public importance are presented, there is no
necessitytoshowthatthesuitorhasexperiencedorisinactualdangerofsufferingdirectandpersonalinjuryas
therequisiteinjuryisassumed.
Petitioners counsel, when queried, hedged on what specific constitutional proscriptions or concepts had been
infringedbytheawardofthesubjectautomationprojecttoSmartmaticTIMCorporation,althoughhewasheard
tosaythat"ourobjectiontothesystemisanchoredontheConstitutionitselfaviolation[sic]ofsecrecyofvoting
and the sanctity of the ballot."41 Petitioners also depicted the covering automation contract as constituting an
abdication by the Comelec of its electionrelated mandate under the Constitution, which is to enforce and
administeralllawsrelativetotheconductofelections.Worsestill,accordingtothepetitioners,theabdication,with
its antidummy dimension, is in favor of a foreign corporation that will be providing the hardware and software
requirements.42 And when pressed further, petitioners came out with the observation that, owing in part to the
sheerlengthoftheballot,thePCOSwouldnotcomplywithArt.V,Sec.2oftheConstitution43prescribingsecrecy
ofvotingandsanctityoftheballot.44
There is no doubt in our mind, however, about the compelling significance and the transcending public
importanceoftheoneissueunderpinningthispetition:thesuccessandthefarreachinggrimimplicationsofthe
failureofthenationwideautomationprojectthatwillbeimplementedviathechallengedautomationcontract.
The doctrinal formulation may vary, but the bottom line is that the Court may except a particular case from the
operations of its rules when the demands of justice so require.45 Put a bit differently, rules of procedure are
merely tools designed to facilitate the attainment of justice.46 Accordingly, technicalities and procedural barriers
shouldnotbeallowedtostandintheway,iftheendsofjusticewouldnotbesubservedbyarigidadherenceto
the rules of procedure.47 This postulate on procedural technicalities applies to matters of locus standi and the
presently invoked principle of hierarchy of courts, which discourages direct resort to the Court if the desired
redressiswithinthecompetenceoflowercourtstogrant.Thepolicyonthehierarchyofcourts,whichpetitioners
indeed failed to observe, is not an ironclad rule. For indeed the Court has full discretionary power to take
cognizance and assume jurisdiction of special civil actions for certiorari and mandamus filed directly with it for
exceptionallycompellingreasons48orifwarrantedbythenatureoftheissuesclearlyandspecificallyraisedinthe
petition.49
The exceptions that justify a deviation from the policy on hierarchy appear to obtain under the premises. The
Courtwillforthenoncethusturnablindeyetothejudicialstructureintended,firstandforemost,toprovidean
orderlydispensationofjustice.
HierarchyofCourts

At this stage, we shall dispose of another peripheral issue before plunging into the core substantive issues
tenderedinthispetition.
Respondents contend that petitioners should have availed themselves of the otherwise mandatory protest
mechanism set forth in Sections 55 and 58 of the procurement law (RA 9184) and the counterpart provisions
foundinitsImplementingRulesandRegulations(IRR)Abeforeseekingjudicialremedy.Insofarasrelevant,Sec.
55ofRA9184providesthatdecisionsofthebidsandawardscommittee(BAC)inallstagesofprocurementmay
be protested, via a "verified position paper," to the head of the procuring agency. On the other hand, the
succeeding Sec. 58 states that court action may be resorted to only after the protest contemplated in Sec. 55
shallhavebeencompleted.Petitionersexcept.Asargued,therequirementtocomplywiththeprotestmechanism,
contrarytowhatmayhavebeensuggestedinInfotech,isimposedonthebidders.50
Petitionerspositioniscorrect.Asamatterofcommonsense,onlyabidderisentitledtoreceiveanoticeofthe
protested BAC action. Only a losing bidder would be aggrieved by, and ergo would have the personality to
challenge,suchaction.ThisconclusionfindsadequatesupportfromtheensuingprovisionsoftheaforesaidIRR
A:
55.2.Theverifiedpositionpapershallcontainthefollowingdocuments:
a)Thenameofbidder
b)Theofficeaddressofthebidderxxx.
SUBSTANTIVEISSUES
Wenowturntothecentralissuestenderedinthepetitionwhich,intermsofsubjectmatter,revolvedaroundtwo
concerns,viz:(1)theJointVentureAgreement(JVA)ofSmartmaticandTIMand(2)thePCOSmachinestobe
used.Petitionersveritablyintroducedanotherissueduringtheoralarguments,asamplifiedintheirmemorandum,
i.e. the constitutionality and statutory flaw of the automation contract itself. The petitioninintervention confined
itselftocertainfeaturesofthePCOSmachines.
TheJointVentureAgreement:ItsExistenceandSubmission
The issue respecting the existence and submission of the TIMSmartmatic JVA does not require an extended
disquisition, as repairing to the records would readily provide a satisfactory answer. We note in fact that the
petitioners do not appear to be earnestly pressing the said issue anymore, as demonstrated by their counsels
practically cavalier discussion thereof during the oral argument. When reminded, for instance, of private
respondentsinsistenceonhavinginfactsubmittedtheirJVAdatedApril23,2009,petitionerscounselresponded
asfollows:"Weknewyourhonorthattherewas,infact,ajointventureagreementfiled.However,becauseofthe
belated discovery that [there] were irreconcilable differences, we then made a view that this joint venture
agreement was a sham, at best pro forma because it did not contain all the required stipulations in order to
evidenceunityofinterestxxx."51
Indeed, the records belie petitioners initial posture that TIM and Smartmatic, as joint venture partners, did not
includeintheirsubmittedeligibilityenvelopeacopyoftheirJVA.TheSBACsPostQualificationEvaluationReport
(Eligibility) on TIMSmartmatic, on page 10, shows the following entry: "Valid Joint Venture Agreement, stating
amongthings,thatthemembersarejointlyandseverallyliableforthewholeobligation,incaseofjointventure
Documentsverifiedcompliance."52
Contrary to what the petitioners posit, the duly notarized JVA, as couched, explained the nature and the limited
purpose53ofthejointventureandexpresslydefined,amongotherthings,thecomposition,scope,andthe6040
capitalstructureoftheaggroupment.54TheJVAalsocontainsprovisionsonthemanagement55 and division of
profits.56 Article 357 of the JVA delineates the respective participations and responsibilities of the joint venture
partnersintheautomationproject.
Given the foregoing perspective, the Court is at a loss to understand how petitioners can assert that the
SmartmaticTIM consortium has failed to prove its joint venture existence and/or to submit evidence as would
enabletheComelectoknowsuchitemsaswhoitisdealingwith,whichbetweenthepartnershascontroloverthe
decisionmakingprocess,theamountofinvestmenttobecontributedbyeachpartner,thepartiessharesinthe
profitsandlikedetails.Hadpetitionersonlybotheredtoundertaketheusualduediligencethatcomeswithgood
judgmentandexaminedtheeligibilityenvelopeoftheSmartmaticTIMjointventure,theywouldhavediscovered
thattheirchallengetoandargumentsagainstthejointventureanditsJVAhavereallynofactualbasis.
It may be, as petitioners observed, that the TIMSmartmatic joint venture remained an unincorporated
aggroupmentduringthebidopeningandevaluationstages.Itoughttobestressed,however,thatthefactofnon
incorporation was without a vitiating effect on the validity of the tender offers. For the bidding ground rules, as

spelled out primarily in the RFP and the clarificatory bid bulletins, does not require, for bidding purposes, that
there be an incorporation of the bidding joint ventures or consortiums. In fact, Bid Bulletin Nos. 19 and 20
recognize the existence and the acceptability of proposals of unincorporated joint ventures. In response to a
poser,forexample,regardingthe60%Filipinoownershiprequirementinajointventurearrangement,theSBAC,
in its Bid Bulletin No. 22, stated: "In an unincorporated joint venture, determination of the required Filipino
participation may be made by examining the terms and conditions of the [JVA] and other supporting financial
documents submitted by the joint venture." (Emphasis ours.) Petitioners, to be sure, have not shown that
incorporationispartofthepass/failcriteriausedindeterminingeligibility.
Petitioners have made much of the Courts ruling in Information Technology Foundation of the Philippines
[Infotech]v.Comelec,58arguinginrelationtheretothatthepartnershipofSmartmaticandTIMdoesnotmeetthe
Courts definition of a joint venture which requires "community of interest in the performance of the subject
matter."
Petitioners invocation of Infotech is utterly misplaced. Albeit Infotech and this case are both about modernizing
the election process and bidding joint ventures, the relevant parallelism ends there. Cast as they are against
dissimilarfactualmilieu,onecannotplausiblysetInfotechsidewithandcontextuallyapplytothiscasetheratioof
Infotech. Suffice it to delve on the most glaring of differences. In Infotech, the winning bid pertained to the
consortiumofMegaPacific,apurportedjointventure.Extantrecords,however,donotshowtheformationofsuch
jointventure,letaloneitscomposition.ToborrowfromtheponenciaofthenJustice,laterChiefJustice,Artemio
Panganiban,"thereisnosignwhatsoeverofany[JVA],consortiumagreement[or]memorandumagreementxxx
executedamongthemembersofthepurportedconsortium."59 There was in fine no evidence to show that the
alleged joint venture partners agreed to constitute themselves into a single entity solidarily responsible for the
entiretyoftheautomationcontract.UnlikethepurportedMegaPacificconsortiuminInfotech,theexistenceinthis
case of the bidding joint venture of Smarmatic and TIM is properly documented and spread all over the bid
documents. And to stress, TIM and Smartmatic, in their JVA, unequivocally agreed between themselves to
performtheirrespectiveundertakings.Andoverandbeyondtheircommitmentstoeachother,theyundertookto
incorporate, if called for by the bidding results, a JVC that shall be solidarily liable with them for any actionable
breachoftheautomationcontract.
InInfotech,theCourtchastisedtheComelecfordealingwithanentity,thefullidentityofwhichthepollbodyknew
nothingabout.Takingacuefromthisholding,petitionerstagtheTIMSmartmaticJVAasflawedandasonethat
wouldleavetheComelec"hanging"forthenoninclusion,asmembersofthejointventure,ofthreeITproviders.
ThethreereferredtoareJarltechInternational,Inc.(Jarltech),asubsidiaryofSmartmaticthatmanufacturesthe
SmartmaticvotingmachinesDominionVotingSystems(Domino),theinventorofsaidPCOSmachinesand2GO
Transportation System Corporation (2GO), the subcontractor responsible for the distribution of the PCOS
machinesthroughoutthecountry.
Petitioners beef against the TIMSmartmatic JVA is untenable. First off, the Comelec knows the very entities
whom they are dealing with, which it can hold solidary liable under the automation contract, should there be
contractviolation.Secondly,thereisnorequirementundereitherRA8436,asamended,ortheRFP,thatallthe
suppliers, manufacturers or distributors involved in the transaction should be part of the joint venture. On the
contrary,theInstructiontoBiddersaspetitionersthemselvesadmit60allowsthebiddertosubcontractportions
ofthegoodsorservicesundertheautomationproject.61
Todigressabit,petitionershaveinsistedonthenonexistenceofabonafideJVAbetweenTIMandSmarmatic.
Failingtogaintractionfortheirindefensibleposture,theywouldthrustontheCourtthenotionofaninvalidjoint
ventureduetothenoninclusionofmorecompaniesintheexistingTIMSmartmaticjointventure.Theironyisnot
lostontheCourt.
ThisbringsustothetwintechnicalissuestenderedhereinbearingonthePCOSmachinesofSmartmatic.
Atitsmostbasic,thepetitionascribesgraveabuseofdiscretiontotheComelecfor,amongotherthings,awarding
the automation project in violation of RA 8436, as amended. Following their line, no pilot test of the PCOS
technology SmartmaticTIM offered has been undertaken hence, the Comelec cannot conduct a nationwide
automationofthe2010pollsusingthemachinesthusoffered.Hence,thecontractawardtoSmartmaticTIMwith
theiruntestedPCOSmachinesviolatedRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369,whichmandatesthatwithrespectto
theMay2010electionsandonwards,thesystemprocuredmusthavebeenpilotedinatleast12areasreferredto
inSec.6ofRA8436,asamended.Whatismore,petitionersassert,privaterespondentsPCOSmachinesdonot
satisfytheminimumsystemcapabilitiessetbythesamelawenvisagedtoensuretransparentandcrediblevoting,
counting and canvassing of votes. And as earlier narrated, petitioners would subsequently add the abdication
angleintheirbidtonullifytheautomationcontract.
PilotTestingNotNecessary
Disagreeing,astobeexpected,privaterespondentsmaintainthatthereisnothingintheapplicablelawrequiring,

asaprerequisiteforthe2010electionautomationprojectaward,thattheprevailingbiddersautomationsystem,
thePCOSinthiscase,besubjectedtopilottesting.Comelecechoesitscorespondentsstanceonpilottesting,
with the added observation that nowhere in the statutory provision relied upon are the words "pilot testing"
used.62TheSenatespositionanditssupportingargumentsmatchthoseofprivaterespondents.
The respondents thesis on pilot testing and the logic holding it together are well taken. There can be no
argumentaboutthephrase"pilottest"notbeingfoundinthelaw.Butdoesitnecessarilyfollowthatapilottestis
absolutelynotcontemplatedinthelaw?Werepairtothestatutoryprovisionpetitionerscitedasrequiringapilot
run,referringtoSec.6ofRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369,readingasfollows:
Sec.5.AuthoritytouseanAutomatedElectionSystem.Tocarryouttheabovestatedpolicy,the[Comelec],xxx
isherebyauthorizedtouseanautomatedelectionsystemorsystemsinthesameelectionindifferentprovinces,
whetherpaperbasedoradirectrecordingelectronicelectionsystemasitmaydeemappropriateandpracticalfor
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 elections, which shall be held immediately after the
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 [Comelec]: Provided, further, That local government units
whose officials have been the subject of administrative charges within sixteen (16) month prior to the May 14,
2007 elections shall not be chosen. Provided,finally, That no area shall be chosen without the consent of the
Sanggunian of the local government unit concerned. The term local government unit as used in this provision
shallrefertoahighlyurbanizedcityorprovince.Insucceedingregularnationalorlocalelections,theAESshallbe
implemented.(Emphasisandunderscoringadded.)
RA 9369, which envisages an AES, be it paperbased or directrecording electronic, took effect in the second
weekofFebruary2007orthereabout.63The"regularnationalandlocalelections"referredtoafterthe"effectivity
ofthisAct"canbenootherthantheMay2007regularelections,duringwhichtimetheAESshall,asthelawis
worded,beusedinatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandprovincesinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao.TheCourt
takesjudicialnoticethattheMay2007electionsdidnotdeployAES,evidentlyduetothemixoftimeandfunding
constraints.
Tothepetitioners,theunderscoredportionoftheaforequotedSec.6ofRA8436isthepilottestingprovisionthat
Comelecfailedtoobserve.
Wearenotpersuaded.
From the practical viewpoint, the pilot testing of the technology in question in an actual, scheduled electoral
exercise under harsh conditions would have been the ideal norm in computerized system implementation. The
underscoredprovisoofSec.6ofRA8436isnot,however,anauthorityforthepropositionthatthepilottestingof
thePCOSinthe2007nationalelectionsintheareasthusspecifiedisanabsolutemustforthemachinesusein
the 2010 national/local elections. The Court can concede that said proviso, with respect to the May 2007
elections,commandstheComelectoautomateinatleast12definedareasofthecountry.Butthebottomlineis
that the required 2007 automation, be it viewed in the concept of a pilot test or not, is not a mandatory
requirementforthechoiceofsystemin,oraprerequisitefor,thefullautomationoftheMay2010elections.
Asmaybenoted,Sec.6ofRA8436maybebrokenintothreeessentialparts,thefirstpartakingofthenatureofa
general policy declaration: that Comelec is authorized to automate the entire elections. The second part states
thatfortheregularnationalandlocalelectionsthatshallbeheldinMay2007,ComelecshallusetheAES,withan
option,however,toundertakeautomation,regardlessofthetechnologytobeselected,inalimitedareaor,tobe
moreprecise,inatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinceseachinLuzon,Visayas,andMindanaoto
bechosenbytheComelec.Ontheotherhand,thelastpart,phrasedsansreferencetotheMay2007elections,
commands thus: "[I]n succeeding regular national or local elections, the [automated election system] shall be
implemented." Taken in its proper context, the last part is indicative of the legislative intent for the May 2010
electoralexercisetobefullyautomated,regardlessofwhetherornotpilottestingwasruninthe2007polls.
To argue that pilot testing is a condition precedent to a full automation in 2010 would doubtless undermine the
purposeofRA9369.For,asaptlyobservedduringtheoralarguments,iftherewasnopoliticalexerciseinMay
2007,thecountrywouldtheoreticallybebarredforeverfromhavingfullautomation.
Sec. 6 of the amended RA 8436, as couched, therefore, unmistakably conveys the idea of unconditional full
automationinthe2010elections.AconstrualmakingpilottestingoftheAESaprerequisiteorconditionsinequa
nontoputtingthesysteminoperationinthe2010electionsistantamounttoreadingintosaidsectionsomething
beyond the clear intention of Congress, as expressed in the provision itself. We reproduce with approval the
followingexcerptsfromthecommentoftheSenateitself:
The plain wordings of RA 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.64
Lestitbeoverlooked,anAESisnotsynonymoustoandoughtnottobeconfusedwiththePCOS.Sec.2(a)ofRA
8436,asamended,definesanAESas"asystemusingappropriatetechnologywhichhasbeendemonstratedin
the voting, counting, consolidating, canvassing and transmission of election results, and other electoral
processes."Ontheotherhand,PCOSreferstoatechnologywhereinanopticalballotscanner,intowhichoptical
scanpaperballotsmarkedbyhandbythevoterareinsertedtobecounted.65Whatmayreasonablybededuced
from these definitions is that PCOS is merely one of several automated voting, counting or canvassing
technologiescomingwithinthetermAES,implyinginturnthattheautomatedelectionsystemortechnologythat
the Comelec shall adopt in future elections need not, as a matter of mandatory arrangement, be piloted in the
advertedtwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandprovinces.
Inperspective,whatmaybetakenasmandatoryprerequisiteforthefullautomationofthe2010regularnational/
localelectionsisthatthesystemtobeprocuredforthatexercisebeatechnologytestedeitherhereorabroad.
TheensuingSection8ofRA8436,asamended,saysso.
SEC 12. Procurement of Equipment and Materials. To achieve the purpose of this Act, the Commission is
authorizedtoprocure,xxx,bypurchase,lease,rentorotherformsofacquisition,supplies,equipment,materials,
software, facilities, and other services, from local or foreign sources xxx. With respect to the May 10, 2010
electionsandsucceedingelectoralexercises,thesystemprocuredmusthavedemonstratedcapabilityandbeen
successfully used in prior electoral exercise here or abroad. Participation in the 2007 pilot exercise shall not be
conclusiveofthesystemsfitness.(Emphasissupplied).
While the underscored portion makes reference to a "2007 pilot exercise," what it really exacts is that, for the
automation of the May 2010 and subsequent elections, the PCOS or any AES to be procured must have
demonstrateditscapabilityandsuccessineitheralocaloraforeignelectoralexercise.Andasexpresslydeclared
bytheprovision,participationinthe2007electoralexerciseisnotaguaranteenorisitconclusiveofthesystems
fitness. In this regard, the Court is inclined to agree with private respondents interpretation of the underscored
portioninquestion:"Theprovisionclearlyconveysthatthe[AES]tobeusedinthe2010electionsneednothave
beenusedinthe2007elections,andthatthedemonstrationofitscapabilityneednotbeinapreviousPhilippine
election. Demonstration of the success and capability of the PCOS may be in an electoral exercise in a foreign
jurisdiction."66 As determined by the Comelec, the PCOS system had been successfully deployed in previous
electoralexercisesinforeigncountries,suchasOntario,CanadaandNewYork,USA,67 albeit Smartmatic was
not necessarily the system provider. But then, RA 9369 does not call for the winning bidder of the 2010
automation project and the deploying entity/provider in the foreign electoral exercise to be one and the same
entity.Neitherdoesthelawincidentallyrequirethatthesystembefirstusedinanarchipelagiccountryorwitha
topographyoravotingpopulationsimilartoorapproximatingthatofthePhilippines.
Atanyevent,anylingeringdoubtontheissueofwhetherornotfullautomationofthe2010regularelectionscan
validly proceed without a pilot run of the AES should be put to rest with the enactment in March 2009 of RA
9525,68inwhichCongressappropriatedPhP11.301billiontoautomatethe2010elections,subjecttocompliance
withthetransparencyandaccuracyrequirementsinselectingtherelevanttechnologyofthemachines,thus:
Sec.2.UseofFunds.xxxProvided,however, That disbursement of the amounts herein appropriated or any
part thereof shall be authorized only in strict compliance with the Constitution, the provisions of [RA] No. 9369
and other election laws incorporated in said Act as to ensure the conduct of a free, orderly, clean, honest and
credibleelectionandshalladoptsuchmeasuresthatwillguarantytransparencyandaccuracyintheselectionof
the relevant technology of the machines to be used on May 10, 2010 automated national and local elections.
(Emphasisadded.)
ItmaysafelybeassumedthatCongressapprovedthebillthateventuallybecameRA9525,fullyawarethatthe
systemusingthePCOSmachineswerenotpilotedinthe2007electoralexercise.TheenactmentofRA9525isto
us a compelling indication that it was never Congress intent to make the pilot testing of a particular automated
electionsysteminthe2007electionsaconditionprecedenttoitsuseorawardofthe2010AutomationProject.
ThecommentininterventionoftheSenatesaysasmuch.
Further,thehighlychargedissueofwhetherornotthe2008ARMMelectionscovering,asNCCobserved,three
conflictriddenislandprovincesmaybetreatedassubstantialcompliancewiththe"pilottest"requirementmust
beansweredintheaffirmative.NolessthanSenatorRichardJ.Gordonhimself,theauthorofthelaw,saidthat
"the system has been tried and tested in the ARMM elections last year, so we have to proceed with the total
implementationofthelaw."69
Wenote,though,theconflictingviewsoftheNCC70andITFP71onthematter.Sufficeittostateatthisjuncture
thatthesystemusedinthe2008ARMMelectionexercisebears,aspetitionerstoanextentgrudginglyadmit,72a
similaritywiththePCOS.Thefollowing,liftedfromtheComelecscomment,istousafairdescriptionofhowthe

twosystems(PCOSandCCOS)workandwherethedifferencelies:
xxx the elections in the [ARMM] utilized the Counting Center Optical Scan (CCOS), a system which uses the
OpticalMarkReader(OMR),thesametechnologyasthePCOS.
Under the CCOS, the voters cast their votes by shading or marking the circles in the paper ballots which
correspondedtothenamesoftheirchosencandidates[likeinPCOS].Thereafter,theballotboxeswerebrought
tothecountingcenterswheretheywerescanned,countedandcanvassed.
xxxUnderthePCOS,thecounting,consolidationandcanvassingofthevotesaredoneattheprecinctlevel.The
election results at the precincts are then electronically transmitted to the next level, and so on. xxx PCOS
dispenseswiththephysicaltransportationofballotboxesfromtheprecinctstothecountingcenters.73
Moreover, it has been proposed that a partial automation be implemented for the May 2010 elections in
accordance with Section 5 of RA 8436, as amended by RA 9369 instead of full automation. The Court cannot
agreeassuchpropositionhasnobasisinlaw.Section5,asworded,doesnotallowforpartialautomation.Infact,
Section 5 clearly states that "the AES shall be implemented nationwide."74 It behooves this Court to follow the
letterandintentofthelawforfullautomationintheMay2010elections.
PCOSMeetsMinimumCapabilitiesStandards
As another ground for the nullification of the automation contract, petitioners posit the view that the PCOS
machinesdonotsatisfytheminimumsystemcapabilitiesprescribedbyRA8436,asamended.Toaspecificpoint,
they suggest that the PCOS system offered and accepted lacks the features that would assure accuracy in the
recording and reading of votes, as well as in the tabulation, consolidation/canvassing, electronic transmission,
storage results and accurate ballot counting.75 In this particular regard, petitioners allege that, based on
Smartmatics website, the PCOS has a margin of error of from 2% to 10%, way beyond that of the required
99.99%accuracyinthecountingofvotes.76
The minimum system capabilities provision cited is Sec. 7 of RA 8436, as amended, and the missing features
referredtobypetitionersarepars.(b)and(j).Infull,Sec.7ofRA8436,asamended,reads:
SEC. 6. Minimum System Capabilities. The automated election system must at least have the following
functionalcapabilities:
(a)Adequatesecurityagainstunauthorizedaccess
(b)Accuracyinrecordingandreadingofvotesaswellasinthetabulation,consolidation/canvassing,
electronictransmission,andstorageofresults
(c)Errorrecoveryincaseofnoncatastrophicfailureofdevice
(d)Systemintegritywhichensuresphysicalstabilityandfunctioningofthevoterecordingandcounting
process
(e)Provisionforvoterverifiedpaperaudittrail
(f)Systemauditabilitywhichprovidessupportingdocumentationforverifyingthecorrectnessofreported
electionresults
(g)Anelectionmanagementsystemforpreparingballotsandprogramsforuseinthecastingandcounting
ofvotesandtoconsolidate,reportanddisplayelectionresultintheshortesttimepossible
(h)Accessibilitytoilliteratesanddisabledvoters
(i)Votetabulatingprogramforelection,referendumorplebiscite
(j)Accurateballotcounters
(k)Dataretentionprovision
(l)Provideforthesafekeeping,storingandarchivingofphysicalorpaperresourceusedintheelection
process
(m)Utilizeorgenerateofficialballotsashereindefined
(a)Providethevoterasystemofverificationtofindoutwhetherornotthemachinehasregisteredhis
choiceand

(o)Configureaccesscontrolforsensitivesystemdataandfunction.
In the procurement of this system, the Commission shall develop and adopt an evaluation system to ascertain
that the above minimum system capabilities are met. The evaluation system shall be developed with the
assistanceofanadvisorycouncil.
Fromtherecordsbeforeus,theCourtisfairlysatisfiedthattheComelechasadoptedarigidtechnicalevaluation
mechanism, a set of 26item/check list criteria, as will be enumerated shortly, to ensure compliance with the
aboveminimumsystemscapabilities.
TheSBACMemorandum77ofJune03,2009,asapprovedbyComelecRes.8608,78categoricallystatedthatthe
SBACTWGsubmitteditsreportthatTIM/SmartmaticsproposedsystemsandmachinesPASSEDalltheendto
end demo tests using the aforementioned 26item criteria, inclusive of the accuracy rating test of at least
99.955%.AsappearingintheSBACTWGreport,thecorrespondinganswers/remarkstoeachofthe26individual
itemsareashereinindicated:79
ITEM

REQUIREMENT

REMARK/DESCRIPTION

Doesthesystemallow
manualfeedingofa
ballotintothePCOS
machine?

Yes. The proposed PCOS machine accepted the test

ballotswhichweremanuallyfedoneatatime.

Doesthesystemscana
ballotsheetatthespeed
ofatleast2.75inches
persecond?

Yes. A 30inch ballot was used in this test. Scanning the

30inch ballot took 2.7 seconds, which translated to
11.11inchespersecond.

Is the system able to

capture and store in an
encrypted format the
digital images of the
ballot for at least 2,000
ballot
sides
(1,000
ballots,withbacktoback
printing)?

Yesthesystemcapturedtheimagesofthe1,000ballotsin
encrypted format. Each of the 1,000 images files
contained the images of the front and back sides of the
ballot,totalingto2,000ballotside.
To verify the captured ballot images, decrypted copies of
the encrypted files were also provided. The same were
foundtobedigitizedrepresentationsoftheballotscast.

Is the system a fully Yes. The proposed PCOS is a fully integrated single
integrated single device device, with builtin printer and builtin data
as described in item no. communicationsports(EthernetandUSB).
4ofComponent1B?

Doesthesystemhavea Yes. A portion of a filled up marked oval was blown up

scanningresolutionofat using image editor software to reveal the number of dots
least200dpi?
perinch.Thesampleimageshowed200dpi.
File properties of the decrypted image file also revealed
200dpi.

Doesthesystemscanin
grayscale?

Yes. 30 shades of gray were scanned in the test PCOS

machine, 20 of which were required, exceeding the
required 4bit/16 levels of gray as specified in the Bid
BulletinNo.19.

Doesthesystemrequire Yes. The system required the use of a security key with
authorization
and different sets of passwords/PINs for Administrator and
authentication of all Operatorusers.
operators, such as, but
not
limited
to,
usernames
and
passwords, with multiple
useraccesslevels?

Doesthesystemhave
anelectronicdisplay?

Yes.ThePCOSmachinemakesuseofanLCDdisplayto
showinformation:
ifaballotmaybeinsertedintothemachine

ifaballotisbeingprocessedifaballotisbeingrejected
on other instructions
voter/operator.

and

information

to

the

Doesthesystememploy
error
handling
procedures, including,
but not limited to, the
useoferrorpromptsand
other
related
instructions?

Yes. The PCOS showed error messages on its screen

whenever a ballot is rejected by the machine and gives
instructionstothevoteronwhattodonext,orwhenthere
wasaballotjamerror.

10

Does the system count

the voters vote as
marked on the ballot
with an accuracy rating
ofatleast99.995%?

Yes.Thetworoundsoftestswereconductedforthistest
using only valid marks/shades on the ballots. 20,000
marks were required to complete this test, with only one
(1)allowablereadingerror.
625 ballots with 32 marks each were used for this test.
During the comparison of the PCOSgenerated results
with the manually prepared/predetermined results, it was
found out that there were seven (7) marks which were
inadvertently missed out during ballot preparation by the
TWG.AlthoughthePCOSgeneratedresultsturnedoutto
be100%accurate,the20,000markwasnotmetthereby
requiringthetesttoberepeated.
To prepare for other possible missed out marks,650
ballots with (20,800 marks) were used for the next round
oftest,whichalsoyielded100%accuracy.

11

Doesthesystemdetect
andrejectfakeor
spurious,andpreviously
scannedballots?

Yes.Thistestmadeuseofone(1)photocopiedballotand
one (1) "recreated" ballot. Both were rejected by the
PCOS.

12

Doesthesystemscan
bothsidesofaballot
andinanyorientationin
onepass?

Yes. Four (4) ballots with valid marks were fed into the
PCOS machine in the four (4) portrait orientations
specifiedinBidBulletinNo.4(eitherbackorfront,upside
downorrightsideup),andallwereaccuratelycaptured.

13

Does the system have

necessarysafeguardsto
determine
the
authenticity of a ballot,
such as, but not limited
to,theuseofbarcodes,
holograms, color shifting
ink, micro printing, to be
provided on the ballot,
whichcanberecognized
bythesystem?

Yes. The system was able to recognize if the security

featuresontheballotare"missing".

Arethenamesofthe
candidatespreprinted
ontheballot?

Yes.TheTwosampletestballotsofdifferentlengthswere
provided:one(1)was14incheslongwhiletheotherwas
30incheslong.Bothwere8.5incheswide.

14

Aside from the test on the fake or spurious ballots (Item

No.11),three(3)testballotswithtamperedbarcodesand
timing marks were used and were all rejected by the
PCOSmachine.
ThephotocopiedballotinthetestforItemNo.11wasnot
able to replicate the UV ink pattern on top portion of the
ballotcausingtherejectionoftheballot.

Thefirstshowed108preprintedcandidatenamesforthe
fourteen (14) contests/positions, including two (2) survey
questions on gender and age group, and a plebiscite
question.
Theothershowed609preprintedcandidatenames,also
for fourteen (14) positions including three (3) survey
questions.
15

Does each side of the Yes.The30inchballot,whichwasusedtotestItemNo.2,

ballot
sheet contained 309 names for the national positions and 300

accommodate at least
300
names
of
candidates
with
a
minimumfontsizeof10,
in addition to other
mandatory information
requiredbylaw?

namesforlocalpositions.Thetotalpreprintednameson
theballottotaled609.

16

Does
the
system
recognize full shade
marks
on
the
appropriate space on
the ballot opposite the
nameofthecandidateto
bevotedfor?

Yes.Theballotsusedfortheaccuracytest(ItemNo.10),
which made use of full shade marks, were also used in
this test and were accurately recognized by the PCOS
machine.

17

Does
the
system Yes.Four(4)testballotswereusedwithone(1)mark
recognize partial shade eachperballotshowingthefollowingpencilmarks:
marks
on
the
tophalfshade
appropriate space on
the ballot opposite the
bottomhalfshade
nameofthecandidateto
bevotedfor?
lefthalfshadeand

Thistypeoftestballotwasalsousedfortestvotingbythe
public,includingmembersofthemedia.
ArialNarrow,fontsize10,wasusedintheprintingofthe
candidatenames.

righthalfshade
Thesepartialshademarkswereallrecognizedbythe
PCOSmachine
18

Does
the
system Yes. One (1) test ballot with one check () mark, using a
recognize
check pencil,wasusedforthistest.
()marks
on
the
appropriate space on Themarkwasrecognizedsuccessfully.
the ballot opposite the
nameofthecandidateto
bevotedfor?

19

Does
the
system Yes. One (1) test ballot with one x mark, using a pencil,
recognize x marks on wasusedforthistest.
the appropriate space
on the ballot opposite Themarkwasrecognizedsuccessfully.
the name of the
candidate to be voted
for?

20

Does
the
system Yes.The1000ballotsusedintheaccuracytest(ItemNo.
recognize both pencil 10)weremarkedusingtheproposedmarkingpenbythe
and ink marks on the bidder.
ballot?
Aseparateballotwithone(1)pencilmarkwasalsotested.
This mark was also recognized by the PCOS machine.
Moreover, the tests for Items No. 17, 18 and 19 were
madeusingpencilmarksontheballots.

21

In a simulation of a
system shut down, does
the system have error
recoveryfeatures?

Yes. Five (5) ballots were used in this test. The power
cordwaspulledfromthePCOSwhilethe3rdballotwasin
themiddleofthescanningprocedure,suchthatitwasleft
"hanging"intheballotreader.
After resumption of regular power supply, the PCOS
machine was able to restart successfully with notification
totheoperatorthatthereweretwo(2)ballotsalreadycast
in the machine. The "hanging" 3rd ballot was returned to
the operator and was able to be refed into the PCOS
machine. The marks on all five (5) were all accurately
recognized.
Yes. The PCOS was able to transmit to the CCS during

22

Yes. The PCOS was able to transmit to the CCS during

Doesthesystemhave
the endtoend demonstration using GLOBE prepaid
transmissionand
consolidation/canvassing Internetkit.
capabilities?

23

Doesthesystem
Yes. The PCOS saves a backup copy of the ERs, ballot
generateabackupcopy images, statistical report and audit log into a Compact
ofthegeneratedreports, Flash(CF)Card.
inaremovabledata
storagedevice?

24

Does the system have

alternative
power
sources, which will
enable it to fully operate
foratleast12hours?

Yes. A 12 bolt 18AH battery lead acid was used in this

test. The initial test had to be repeated due to a short
circuit, after seven (7) hours from startup without ballot
scanning. This was explained by TIMSmartmatic to be
caused by noncompatible wiring of the battery to the
PCOS. A smaller wire than what is required was
inadvertentlyused,likeningthesituationtoincorrectwiring
of a car battery. Two (2) COMELEC electricians were
called to confirm TIMSmartmatics explanation. The
PCOS machine was connected to regular power and
started successfully. The following day, the "retest" was
completed in 12 hours and 40 minutes xxx 984 ballots
were fed into the machine. The ER, as generated by the
PCOS was compared with predetermined result, showed
100%accuracy.

25

Isthesystemcapableof
generatingandprinting
reports?

Yes. The PCOS prints reports via its builtin printer which
includes:

Didthebidder
successfully
demonstrateEMS,
votingcounting,
consolidation/canvassing
andtransmission?

Yes.Anendtoenddemonstrationofallproposed
systemswaspresentedcovering:importingofelection
dataintotheEMScreationofelectionconfigurationdata
forthePCOSandtheCCSusingEMScreationofballot
facesusingEMSconfiguringthePCOSandtheCCS
usingtheEMSgeneratedelectionconfigurationfile
initialization,operation,generationofreportsandbackup
usingthePCOSelectronictransmissionofresultstothe:
[1]fromthePCOStocity/municipalCCSandthecentral
server.[2]fromthecity/municipalCCStotheprovincial
CCS.[3]fromtheprovincialCCStothenationalCCS
receiptandcanvassoftransmittedresults:[1]bythe
city/municipalCCSfromthePCOS.[2]bytheprovincial
CCSfromthecity/municipalCCS.[3]bythenationalCCS
fromtheprovincialCCSreceiptofthetransmittalresults
bythecentralserverfromthePCOS.

26

1.InitializationReport2.ElectionReturns(ER)3.PCOS
StatisticalReport4.AuditLog.

Given the foregoing and absent empirical evidence to the contrary, the Court, presuming regularity in the
performance of regular duties, takes the demotesting thus conducted by SBACTWG as a reflection of the
capabilityofthePCOSmachines,althoughthetests,asComelecadmits,80weredoneliterallyinthePalaciodel
Governador building, where a room therein simulated a town, the adjoining room a city, etc. Perusing the RFP,
however, the real worth of the PCOS system and the machines will of course come after they shall have been
subjectedtothegamutofacceptancetestsexpresslyspecifiedintheRFP,namely,thelabtest,fieldtest,mock
electiontest,transmissiontestand,lastly,thefinaltestandsealingprocedureofallPCOSandCCSunitsusing
theactualElectionDaymachineconfiguration.81
1 a v v p h !1

Apropos the countingaccuracy feature of the PCOS machines, petitioners no less impliedly admit that the web
page they appended to their petition, showing a 2% to 10% failing rate, is no longer current.82 And if they
botheredtoexaminethecurrentwebsiteofSmartmaticspecificallydealingwithitsSAES1800,thePCOSsystem
itoffered,theywouldhavereadilyseenthattheadvertisedaccuracyratingisover"99.99999%."83 Moreover, a
careful scrutiny of the old webpage of Smarmatic reveals that the 2% to 10% failure rate applied to "optical
scanners"andnottoSAES.YetthesamepagedisclosesthattheSAEShas"100%"accuracy.Clearly,thealleged
2%to10%failingrateisnowirrelevantandtheCourtneednotbelaborthisandtheequallyirrelevantestoppel

principlepetitionersimposeonus.
IntervenorCuadrasconcernrelatestotheauditabilityoftheelectionresults.Inthisregard,itmaysufficetopoint
outthatPCOS,beingapaperbasedtechnology,affordsauditsincethevoterwouldbeable,ifneedbe,toverifyif
the machine had scanned, recorded and counted his vote properly. Moreover, it should also be noted that the
PCOS machine contains an LCD screen, one that can be programmed or configured to display to the voter his
votesasreadbythemachine.84
NoAbdicationofComelecsMandateandResponsibilty
As a final main point, petitioners would have the ComelecSmartmaticTIM Corporation automation contract
nullifiedsince,inviolationoftheConstitution,itconstitutesawholesaleabdicationofthepollbodysconstitutional
mandateforelectionlawenforcement.Ontopofthisperceivedaberration,themechanismofthePCOSmachines
wouldinfringetheconstitutionalrightofthepeopletothesecrecyoftheballotwhich,accordingtothepetitioners,
isprovidedinSec.2,Art.VoftheConstitution.85
Theabovecontentionisnotwelltaken.
The first function of the Comelec under the Constitution86and the Omnibus Election Code for that matter
relates to the enforcement and administration of all laws and regulations relating to the conduct of elections to
public office to ensure a free, orderly and honest electoral exercise. And how did petitioners come to their
conclusion about their abdication theory? By acceding to Art. 3.3 of the automation contract, Comelec
relinquished,sopetitionersclaim,supervisionandcontrolofthesystemtobeusedfortheautomatedelections.
Toamorespecificpoint,thelossofcontrol,asmaybededucedfromtheensuingexchanges,arosefromthefact
thatComelecwouldnotbeholdingpossessionofwhatinITjargonarethepublicandprivatekeyspair.
CHIEFJUSTICE:Well,morespecificallyareyousayingthatthemaincourseofthislostofcontrolisthefactthat
SMARTMATICholdsthepublicandprivatekeystothesanctityofthissystem?
ATTY.ROQUE:Yes,YourHonor,aswellasthefactthattheycontroltheprogramembeddedinthekeycostthat
willreadtheirvotesbywhichtheelectoratemayverifythattheirvoteswerecounted.
CHIEFJUSTICE:YouaresayingthatSMARTMATICandnotitspartnerTIMwhoholdthesepublicandprivate
keys?
ATTY.ROQUE:Yes,YourHonor.
TheCourtisnotconvinced.ThereistousnothinginArt3.3oftheautomationcontract,evenifreadseparately
fromotherstipulationsandtheprovisionsofthebiddocumentsandtheConstitutionitself,tosupportthesimplistic
conclusionofabdicationofcontrolpressedontheCourt.Insofaraspertinent,Art3.3reads:
3.3ThePROVIDERshallbeliableforallitsobligationsunderthisProjectandtheperformanceofportionsthereof
by other persons or entities not parties to this Contract shall not relieve the PROVIDER of said obligations and
concomitantliabilities.
SMARTMATIC,asthejointventurepartnerwiththegreatertrackrecordinautomatedelections,shallbe
in charge of the technical aspects of the counting and canvassing software and hardware, including
transmission configuration and system integration. SMARTMATIC shall also be primarily responsible for
preventingandtroubleshootingtechnicalproblemsthatmayariseduringtheelections.(Emphasisadded.)
TheprovisodesignatingSmartmaticasthejointventurepartnerinchargeofthetechnicalaspectofthecounting
and canvassing wares does not to us translate, without more, to ceding control of the electoral process to
Smartmatic.ItbearstostressthattheaforesaiddesignationofSmartmaticwasnotpluckedfromthinair,asitwas
in fact an eligibility requirement imposed, should the bidder be a joint venture. Part 5, par. 5.4 (e) of the
InstructiontoBiddersonthesubjectEligibleBidders,whencethesecondparagraphofaforequotedArt.3.3came
from,reads:
5.4AJVoftwoormorefirmsaspartnersshallcomplywiththefollowingrequirements.
xxxx
(e)TheJVmemberwithagreatertrackrecordinautomatedelections,shallbeinchargeofthetechnicalaspects
of the counting and canvassing software and hardware, including transmission configuration and system
integration
And lest it be overlooked, the RFP, which forms an integral part of the automation contract,87 has put all
prospectivebiddersonnoticeofComelecsintenttoautomateandtoacceptbidsthatwouldmeetseveralneeds,

among which is "a complete solutions provider which can provide effective overall nationwide project
management service under COMELEC supervision and control, to ensure effective and successful
implementation of the [automation] Project."88 Complementing this RFP advisory as to control of the election
processisArt.6.7oftheautomationcontract,providing:
6.7 Subject to the provisions of the General Instructions to be issued by the Commission En Banc, the entire
processes of voting, counting, transmission, consolidation and canvassing of votes shall be conducted by
COMELECs personnel and officials, and their performance, completion and final results according to
specificationsandwithinthespecifiedperiodsshallbethesharedresponsibilityofCOMELECandthePROVIDER.
(Emphasisadded.)
But not one to let an opportunity to score points pass by, petitioners rhetorically ask: "Where does Public
Respondent Comelec intend to get this large number of professionals, many of whom are already gainfully
employedabroad?"89TheComelec,citingSec.390andSec.5ofRA8436,91asamended,aptlyansweredthis
poserinthefollowingwise:
xxx[P]ublicrespondentCOMELEC,intheimplementationoftheautomatedproject,willforgepartnershipswith
variousentitiesindifferentfieldstobringaboutthesuccessofthe2010automatedelections.
Public respondent COMELEC will partner with Smartmatic TIM Corporation for the training and hiring of the IT
personnelaswellasforthemassivevotereducationcampaign.Thereisinfactabudgetallocationxxxforthese
undertakings.xxx
AsregardstherequirementofRA9369thatITcapablepersonnelshallbedeputizedasamemberoftheBEIand
thatanotherITcapablepersonshallassisttheBOC,publicrespondentCOMELECshallpartnerwithDOSTand
otheragenciesandinstrumentalitiesofthegovernment.
In not so many words during the oral arguments and in their respective Memoranda, public and private
respondentscategoricallyrejectedoutrightallegationsofabdicationbytheComelecofitsconstitutionalduty.The
petitioners,tostress,arestrangerstotheautomationcontract.Notoneparticipatedinthebiddingconferenceor
thebiddingproperorevenperhapsexaminedthebiddingdocumentsand,therefore,nonereallyknowsthereal
intentionoftheparties.Ascaselawtellsus,thecourthastoferretouttherealintentoftheparties.Whatisfairly
clearinthiscase,however,isthatpetitionerswhoarenotevenprivytothebiddingprocessfoistupontheCourt
their own view on the stipulations of the automation contract and present to the Court what they think are the
parties true intention. It is a study of outsiders appearing to know more than the parties do, but actually
speculatingwhatthepartiesintended.Thefollowingisselfexplanatory:
CHIEFJUSTICE:Whydidyousaythatitdidnot,didyoutalkwiththeChairmanandCommissionersofCOMELEC
thattheyfailedtoperformthisduty,theydidnotexercisethispowerofcontrol?
ATTY.ROQUE:YourHonor,IbaseditonthefactthatitwastheCOMELECinfactthatenteredintothiscontract
.
CHIEFJUSTICE:Yes,butmyquestionisdidyouconfronttheCOMELECofficialsthattheyforfeitedtheirpower
ofcontrolinoverourelectionprocess?
ATTY.ROQUE:Wedidnotconfront,yourHonor.Weimpugnedtheiracts,YourHonor.92
Just as they do on the issue of control over the electoral process, petitioners also anchor on speculative
reasoning their claim that Smartmatic has possession and control over the public and private keys pair that will
operatethePCOSmachines.Consider:PetitionerscounselwasatthestartcocksureaboutSmartmaticscontrol
ofthesekeysand,withitscontrol,oftheelectoralprocess.93
Severalquestionslater,hisanswershadaqualifyingtone:
JUSTICE NACHURA: And can COMELEC under the contract not demand that it have access, that it be given
accesstoandinfactgenerateitsownkeysindependentlywithSMARTMATICsothatitwouldbeCOMELECand
notSMARTMATICthatwouldhavefullcontrolofthetechnologyinsofarasthekeysareconcernedxxx?
ATTY.ROQUE:IdonotknowifCOMELECwillbeinapositiontogeneratethesekeys,xxx.94
Andsubsequently,thespeculativenatureofpetitionerspositionastowhowouldhavepossessionandcontrolof
thekeysbecameapparent.
CHIEF JUSTICE: Yes, but did you check with the COMELEC who will be holding these two keys x x x did you
checkwithCOMELECwhetherthissystemiscorrect?

ATTY.ROQUE:Wehavenothadoccasiontodoso,xxxYourHonor.
xxxx
CHIEFJUSTICE:WhydoyoumakethatpoorconclusionagainsttheCOMELECxxxMaynottheCOMELEChire
theservicesofexpertsinorderfortheinstitutiontobeabletodischargeitsconstitutionalfunctions?
ATTY.ROQUE:Thatistrue,butxxxthereistoomuchrelianceonindividualswhodonothavethesamekindof
accountabilityaspublicofficersxxx
CHIEF JUSTICE: Are you saying that the COMELEC did not consult with available I.T. experts in the country
beforeitmadethebiddingrulesbeforeitconductedthebiddingandmaketheotherpolicyjudgments?
ATTY.ROQUE:YourHonor,whatIamsureisthattheydidnotconferwiththeI.T.Foundationxxx.
CHIEFJUSTICE:Butisthatfoundationtheonlyexpert,doesithaveamonopolyofknowledge?95
TheCourt,tobesure,recognizestheimportanceofthevotesecurityissuerevolvingaroundtheissuanceofthe
public and private keys pair to the Board of Election Inspectors, including the digital signatures. The NCC
commentonthematterdeservesmention,appearingtohewasitdoestowhatappearontherecords.TheNCC
wrote:
TheRFP/TORusedintherecentbiddingfortheAEStobeusedinthe2010electionsspecificallymandatedthe
use of public key cryptography. However, it was left to the discretion of the bidder to propose an acceptable
manner of utilization for approval/acceptance of the Comelec. Nowhere in the RFP/TOR was it indicated that
COMELEC would delegate to the winning bidder the full discretion, supervision and control over the manner of
PKI[PublicKeyInfrastructure]utilization.
Withtheviewwetakeoftheautomationcontract,theroleofSmartmaticTIMCorporationisbasicallytosupplythe
goods necessary for the automation project, such as but not limited to the PCOS machines, PCs, electronic
transmissiondevicesandrelatedequipment,bothhardwareandsoftware,andthetechnicalservicespertainingto
their operation. As lessees of the goods and the backup equipment, the corporation and its operators would
provideassistancewithrespecttothemachinestobeusedbytheComelecwhich,attheendoftheday,willbe
conductingtheelectionthruitspersonnelandwhoeveritdeputizes.
Andifonlytoemphasizeapoint,ComelecscontractiswithSmartmaticTIMCorporationofwhichSmartmaticisa
40% minority owner, per the JVA of TIM and Smartmatic and the Articles of Incorporation of Smartmatic TIM
Corporation.Accordingly,anydecisiononthepartoronbehalfofSmartmaticwillnotbebindingonComelec.Asa
necessarycorollary,theboardroomvotingarrangementthatSmartmaticandTIMmayhaveagreeduponasjoint
venture partners, inclusive of the veto vote that one may have power over the other, should really be the least
concernoftheComelec.
Parenthetically,thecontentionthatthePCOSwouldinfringeonthesecrecyandsanctityoftheballotbecause,as
petitionerswouldputit,thevoterwouldbeconfrontedwitha"threefeet"longballot,96doesnotcommenditself
for concurrence. Surely, the Comelec can 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
feedtheballotintothemachine.Avoter,ifsomindedtopreservethesecrecyofhisballot,willalwaysdevisea
way to do so. By the same token, one with least regard for secrecy will likewise have a way to make his vote
known.
Duringtheoralarguments,thenotionofapossibleviolationoftheAntiDummyLawcroppedup,giventheRFP
requirementofajointventurebiddertobeatleastbe60%Filipino.Ontheotherhand,thewinningbidder,TIM
Smartmatic joint venture, has Smartmatic, a foreign corporation, owning 40% of the equity in, first, the joint
venturepartnership,andtheninSmartmaticTIMCorporation.
TheAntiDummyLaw97pertinentlystates:
Section 1. Penalty. In all cases in which any constitutional or legal provision requires Philippine or any other
specificcitizenshipasarequisitefortheexerciseorenjoymentofaright,franchiseorprivilege,anycitizenofthe
Philippines or of any other specific country who allows his name or citizenship to be used for the purpose of
evadingsuchprovision,andanyalienorforeignerprofitingthereby,shallbepunishedbyimprisonmentxxxand
byafinexxx.
SECTION2.SimulationofminimumcapitalstockInallcasesinwhichaconstitutionalorlegalprovisionrequires
thatacorporationorassociationmayexerciseorenjoyaright,franchiseorprivilege,notlessthanacertainper
centumofitscapitalmustbeownedbycitizensofthePhilippinesoranyotherspecificcountry,itshallbeunlawful
to falsely simulate the existence of such minimum stock or capital as owned by such citizen for the purpose of

evadingsuchprovision.xxx
SECTION2A.Unlawfuluse,ExploitationorEnjoyment.Anyperson,corporation,orassociationwhich,havingin
itsnameorunderitscontrol,aright,franchise,privilege,propertyorbusiness,theexerciseorenjoymentofwhich
isexpresslyreservedbytheConstitutionorthelawstocitizensofthePhilippinesorofanyotherspecificcountry,
or to corporations or associations at least sixty per centum of the capital of which is owned by such citizens,
permits or allows the use, exploitation or enjoyment thereof by a person, corporation, or association not
possessingtherequisitesprescribedbytheConstitutionorthelawsofthePhilippinesorleases,orinanyother
way, transfers or conveys said right, franchise, privilege, property or business to a person, corporation or
associationnototherwisequalifiedundertheConstitutionxxxshallbepunishedbyimprisonmentxxx(Emphasis
added.)
TheAntiDummyLawhasbeenenactedtolimittheenjoymentofcertaineconomicactivitiestoFilipinocitizensor
corporations. For liability for violation of the law to attach, it must be established that there is a law limiting or
reservingtheenjoymentorexerciseofaright,franchise,privilege,orbusinesstocitizensofthePhilippinesorto
corporationsorassociationsatleast60percentumofthecapitalofwhichisownedbysuchcitizens.Inthecase
at bench, the Court is not aware of any constitutional or statutory provision classifying as a nationalized activity
the lease or provision of goods and technical services for the automation of an election. In fact, Sec. 8 of RA
8436,asamended,veststheComelecwithspecificauthoritytoacquireAESfromforeignsources,thus:
SEC 12. Procurement of Equipment and Materials. To achieve the purpose of this Act, the Commission is
authorizedtoprocure,xxx,bypurchase,lease,rentorotherformsofacquisition,supplies,equipment,materials,
software,facilities,andotherservices,fromlocalorforeignsourcesxxx.(Emphasisadded.)
PetitionersciteExecutiveOrderNo.(EO)584,98Seriesof2006,purportedlylimiting"contractsforthesupplyof
materials,goodsandcommoditiestogovernmentownedorcontrolledcorporation,company,agencyormunicipal
corporation"tocorporationsthatare60%Filipino.WedonotquiteseethegoverningrelevanceofEO584.Forlet
alonethefactthatRA9369is,inrelationtoEO584,asubsequentenactmentand,therefore,enjoysprimacyover
the executive issuance, the Comelec does fall under the category of a governmentowned and controlled
corporation,anagencyoramunicipalcorporationcontemplatedintheexecutiveorder.
AviewhasbeenadvancedregardingthesusceptibilityoftheAEStohacking,justlikethevotingmachinesusedin
certain precincts in Florida, USA in the GoreBush presidential contests. However, an analysis of postelection
reportsonthevotingsystemthususedintheUSduringtheperiodmaterialandtheAEStobeutilizedinthe2010
automationprojectseemstosuggeststarkdifferencesbetweenthetwosystems.ThefirstrelatestotheSource
Code,definedinRA9369as"humanreadableinstructionsthatdefinewhatthecomputerequipmentwilldo."99
TheSourceCodeforthe2010AESshallbeavailableandopenedforreviewbypoliticalparties,candidatesand
thecitizensarmsortheirrepresentatives100whereasintheUSprecinctsaforementioned,theSourceCodewas
allegedtohavebeenkeptsecretbythemachinemanufacturecompany,thuskeepingtheAmericanpublicinthe
darkastohowexactlythemachinescountedtheirvotes.Andsecondly,intheAES,thePCOSmachinesfoundin
the precincts will also be the same device that would tabulate and canvass the votes whereas in the US, the
machines in the precincts did not count the votes. Instead the votes cast appeared to have been stored in a
memorycardthatwasbroughttoacountingcenterattheendoftheday.Asaresult,thehackingandcheating
mayhavepossiblyoccurredatthecountingcenter.
Additionally,withtheAES,thepossibilityofsystemhackingisveryslim.ThePCOSmachinesareonlyonlinewhen
theytransmittheresults,whichwouldonlytakearoundonetotwominutes.Inordertohackthesystemduring
thistinyspanofvulnerability,asupercomputerwouldberequired.Noteworthyalsoisthefactthatthememory
cardtobeusedduringtheelectionsisencryptedandreadonlymeaningnoillicitprogramcanbeexecutedor
introducedintothememorycard.
Therefore,eventhoughtheAEShasitsflaws,ComelecandSmartmatichaveseentoitthatthesystemiswell
protectedwithsufficientsecuritymeasuresinordertoensurehonestelections.
Andasindicatedearlier,thejointventureproviderhasformulatedandputinplaceacontinuityandbackupplans
thatwouldaddresstheunderstandableapprehensionofafailureofelectionsincasethemachinesfalterduring
theactualelection.Thisoverallfallbackstrategyincludestheprovisionsfor2,000sparePCOSmachinesontop
of the 80,000 units assigned to an equal number precincts throughout the country. The continuity and backup
plans seek to address the following eventualities: (1) The PCOS fails to scan ballots (2)The PCOS scans the
ballots, but fails to print election returns (ERs) and/or (3) The PCOS prints but fails to transmit the ERs. In the
event item #1 occurs, a spare PCOS, if available, will be brought in or, if not available, the PCOS of another
precinct(PCOS2forclarity),afterobservingcertaindefinedrequirements,101shallbeused.ShouldallthePCOS
machinesintheentiremunicipality/cityfail,manualcountingofthepaperballotsandthemanualaccomplishment
of ERs shall be resorted to in accordance with Comelec promulgated rules on appreciation of automated
ballots.102Intheeventitem#2occurswherethePCOSmachinesfailtoprintERs,theuseofsparePCOSand
thetransferofPCOS2shallbeeffected.ManualcountingofERsshallberesortedtoalsoifallPCOSfailsinthe

entire municipality. And should eventuality #3 transpire, the following backup options, among others, may be
availedof:bringingPCOS1tothenearestprecinctorpollingcenterwhichhasafunctioningtransmissionfacility
insertingtransmissioncableoffunctioningtransmissionlinetoPCOS1andtransmittingstoreddatafromPCOS1
usingfunctioningtransmissionfacility.
Thedisruptionoftheelectionprocessduetomachinebreakdownormalfunctionmaybelimitedtoaprecinctonly
orcouldaffectanentiremunicipal/city.Theworstcasescenarioofcoursewouldbethewholesalebreakdownof
the82,000PCOSmachines.Nonetheless,eveninthismostextremecase,failureofallthemachineswouldnot
necessarilytranslateintofailureofelections.Manualcounttabulationandtransmission,asearlierstated,canbe
done,PCOSbeingapaperballottechnology.Ifthemachinefailsforwhateverreason,thepaperballotswouldstill
bethereforthehandcountingofthevotes,manualtabulationandtransmissionoftheERs.Failureofelections
consequenttovotingmachinesfailurewould,infine,beaveryremotepossibility.
Afinalconsideration.
Thefirststepisalwaysdifficult.Hardlyanythingworks,letaloneendsupperfectlythefirsttimearound.Ashas
oftenbeensaid,ifonelookshardenough,hewillinalllikelihoodfindaglitchinanynewsystem.Itisnowonder
someITspecialistsandpractitionershaveconsideredthePCOSasunsafe,notthemostappropriatetechnology
forPhilippineelections,and"easilyhackable,"even.Andtheworstfearexpressedisthatdisasterisjustwaitingto
happen,thatPCOSwouldnotworkonelectionday.
CongresshaschosentheMay2010electionstobethemaidenrunforfullautomation.Andjudgingfromwhatthe
Courthasheardandreadinthecourseoftheseproceedings,thechoiceofPCOSbyComelecwasnotaspurof
momentaffair,buttheproductofhonesttogoodnessstudies,consultationswithCAC,andlessonslearnedfrom
theARMM2008automatedelections.WiththebackingofCongressbywayofbudgetarysupport,thepollbody
has taken this historic, if not ambitious, first step. It started with the preparation of the RFP/TOR, with a list of
voluminousannexesembodyinginspecificdetailthebiddingrulesandexpectationsfromthebidders.Andaftera
hotlycontestedand,bymostaccounts,ahighlytransparentpublicbiddingexercise,thejointventureofaFilipino
and foreign corporation won and, after its machine hurdled the endtoend demonstration test, was eventually
awarded the contract to undertake the automation project. Not one of the losing or disqualified bidders
questioned, at least not before the courts, the bona fides of the bidding procedures and the outcome of the
biddingitself.
Assayed against the provisions of the Constitution, the enabling automation law, RA 8436, as amended by RA
9369,theRFPandeventheAntiDummyLaw,whichpetitionersinvokedasanafterthought,theCourtfindsthe
project award to have complied with legal prescriptions, and the terms and conditions of the corresponding
automationcontractinquestiontobevalid.Nograveabuseofdiscretion,therefore,canbelaidonthedoorsteps
ofrespondentComelec.Andsurely,thewinningjointventureshouldnotbefaultedforhavingaforeigncompany
aspartner.
TheComelecisanindependentconstitutionalbodywithadistinctandpivotalroleinourschemeofgovernment.
In the discharge of its awesome functions as overseer of fair elections, administrator and lead implementor of
lawsrelativetotheconductofelections,itshouldnotbestymiedwithrestrictionsthatwouldperhapsbejustifiedin
the case of an organization of lesser responsibility.103 It should be afforded ample elbow room and enough
wherewithal in devising means and initiatives that would enable it to accomplish the great objective for which it
was createdto promote free, orderly, honest and peaceful elections. This is as it should be for, too often,
Comelechastomakedecisionsunderdifficultconditionstoaddressunforeseeneventstopreservetheintegrity
of the election and in the process the voice of the people. Thus, in the past, the Court has steered away from
interferingwiththeComelecsexerciseofitspowerwhich,bylawandbythenatureofitsofficeproperlypertainto
it.Absent,therefore,aclearshowingofgraveabuseofdiscretiononComelecspart,ashere,theCourtshould
refrainfromutilizingthecorrectivehandofcertioraritoreview,letalonenullify,theactsofthatbody.Thisgem,
whilenotonallfourswith,isliftedfrom,theCourtsholdinginanoldbutoftcitedcase:
x x x We may not agree fully with [the Comelecs] choice of means, but unless these are clearly illegal or
constitute gross abuse of discretion, this court should not interfere. Politics is a practical matter, and political
questionsmustbedealtwithrealisticallynotfromthestandpointofpuretheory[orspeculation].xxx
xxxx
There are no readymade formulas for solving public problems. Time and experience are necessary to evolve
patternsthatwillservetheendsofgoodgovernment.Inthematteroftheadministrationofthelawsrelativetothe
conductofelections,xxxwemustnotbyanyexcessivezealtakeawayfromthe[Comelec]theinitiativewhichby
constitutional and legal mandates properly belongs to it. Due regard to the independent character of the
Commission x x x requires that the power of this court to review the acts of that body should, as a general
proposition,beusedsparingly,butfirmlyinappropriatecases.104xxx
The Court, however, will not indulge in the presumption that nothing would go wrong, that a successful

automationelectionunmarredbyfraud,violence,andlikeirregularitieswouldbetheorderofthemomentonMay
10, 2010. Neither will it guarantee, as it cannot guarantee, the effectiveness of the voting machines and the
integrityofthecountingandconsolidationsoftwareembeddedinthem.Thattaskbelongsatthefirstinstanceto
Comelec, as part of its mandate to ensure clean and peaceful elections. This independent constitutional
commission,itistrue,possessesextraordinarypowersandenjoysaconsiderablelatitudeinthedischargeofits
functions. The road, however, towards successful 2010 automation elections would certainly be rough and
bumpy.TheComelecislaboringunderverytighttimelines.Itwouldaccordinglyneedthehelpofalladvocatesof
orderly and honest elections, of all men and women of goodwill, to smoothen the way and assist Comelec
personneladdressthefearsexpressedabouttheintegrityofthesystem.Likeanyoneelse,theCourtwouldlike
andwishautomatedelectionstosucceed,credibly.
WHEREFORE,theinstantpetitionisherebyDENIED.
SOORDERED.
PRESBITEROJ.VELASCO,JR.
AssociateJustice
WECONCUR:
REYNATOS.PUNO
ChiefJustice
(Onofficialleave)
LEONARDOA.QUISUMBING
AssociateJustice

CONSUELOYNARESSANTIAGO
AssociateJustice

ANTONIOT.CARPIO
AssociateJustice

RENATOC.CORONA
AssociateJustice

CONCHITACARPIOMORALES
AssociateJustice

MINITAV.CHICONAZARIO
AssociateJustice

ANTONIOEDUARDOB.NACHURA
AssociateJustice

TERESITAJ.LEONARDODECASTRO
AssociateJustice

ARTUROD.BRION
AssociateJustice

DIOSDADOM.PERALTA
AssociateJustice

LUCASP.BERSAMIN
AssociateJustice

MARIANOC.DELCASTILLO
AssociateJustice
ROBERTOA.ABAD
AssociateJustice
CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in the above
DecisionwerereachedinconsultationbeforethecasewasassignedtothewriteroftheopinionoftheCourt.
REYNATOS.PUNO
ChiefJustice

Footnotes
*Onofficialleave.
1 Both corporations are also referred to in the petition and other pleadings as Total Information

Management,Inc.andSmartmaticInternational,Inc.
2Rollo,pp.87Aand87B.

3Id.at576A.DatedJuly28,2009.
4 An Act Amending [RA] 8436, entitled "An Act Authorizing the [Comelec] to Use Automated Election

System in the May 11, 1998 National or Local Elections and in Subsequent National or Local Electoral
Exercises, to Encourage Transparency, Credibility, Fairness and Accuracy of Elections, Amending for the
Purpose Batas Pambansa Blg. 881, as Amended, [RA] 7166 and Other Related Election Laws, Providing
FundsThereforandForOtherPurposes."
5 Composed of, among others, the Chairperson of the Commission on Information and Communications

Technology (CICT), one member each from the Dept. of Education and the Dept. of Science and
TechnologyandthreemembersrepresentingICTprofessionalorganizations.
6Sec.9.
7ItshallbecomposedofarepresentativeeachfromtheCommission,CITCandDOST.
8Sec.11.
9 Composed of the cities and municipalities in the provinces of Isabela (except Isabela City), Sulu, Tawi

Tawi,Maguindanao(exceptCotabatoCity)andLanaodelSur.
10 DRE is a technology wherein a vote is cast directly on a machine by the use of a touch screen,

touchpad, keypad or other device and the machine records the individual votes and calculates the total
voteselectronically.
11 CCOS means a technology wherein an optical ballot scanner, into which optical scan paper ballots

markedbyhandbythevoterareinsertedtobecounted,islocatedineveryvotingcenter.
12Rollo,p.874.PublicRespondentsMemorandum.
13SenateResolutions96and567,s.of2008,authoredbySenatorsGordonandVillar,respectivelysee

Annexes8and9ofprivaterespondentsMemorandum.
14MemorandumoftheNCC,p.23.
15Sec.2ofRA9369defines"paperbasedelectionsystem"asatypeofautomatedelectionsystemthat

uses paper ballots records and counts votes and tabulates, consolidates/canvasses and transmits
electronicallytheresultsofthevotecounts.
16TheGlossaryofTermsoftheRFPdefinesPCOSasreferringtoatechnologywhereinanopticalballot

scanner,intowhichopticalscanpaperballotsmarkedbyhandbythevoterareinsertedtobecounted,is
locatedineveryprecinct.
17Sec.2(10)ofRA8436,asamended,defines"continuityplan"asa"listofcontingencymeasuresand

thepoliciesforactivationofsuch,thatareputinplacetoensurecontinuousoperationoftheAES."
18TheformulationofacontinuityplanisarequirementunderSec.9ofRA8436,theactivationofwhich

shall be undertaken in the presence of political parties representatives and the citizens arm of the
Comelec.
19Terms,ConditionsandInstructiontoBidders,pp.4550oftheRFP.
20 Contains what the RFP refers to as Class "A" documents, referring to legal, technical and financial

documentsandClass"B"documents,amongwhichisavalidJVA,incaseofjointventure.
21ItemIX,par.3.3oftheRFP.
22 Rollo, p. 399. Per Certification of the Director of the Comelecs Education & Information Department,

Annex"4"ofpublicrespondentsComment.
23PublishedonMarch1416,2009.
24Rollo,p.295.PublicrespondentsCommentonthePetition,p.7.

25Par.2.2.4.ofPartIX(B)oftheRFP.
26SmartmaticisasubsidiaryofSmartmaticInternationalHolding,B.V.ofNetherlands.
27TIMSmartmatic,IndraConsortiumandGilatConsortium.
28Rollo,pp.417431.OmnibusSBACRes.09001,Annex"6,"publicrespondentsComment.
29Id.at844848.Annex"10"ofprivaterespondentsMemorandum.
30Testingoftheentiresysteminanactualsimulatedelection.
31Annex"3,"TIMSmartmaticComment.
32Rollo,p.468.Annex"10,"publicrespondentsComment.
33Id.at263281.Annex"2,"SmartmaticTIMCorp.sComment.
34DenominatedastheContractfortheProvisionofanAutomatedElectionSystemfortheMay10,2010

SynchronizedNationalandLocalElections.
35Par.4.1.
36Rollo,p.548.Annex"14,"publicrespondentsComment.
37Id.at887.Memorandumofpublicrespondents,p.23.
38Gonzalesv.Narvasa,G.R.No.140835,August14,2000,337SCRA733,740.
39Tatadv.SecretaryoftheDepartmentofEnergy,G.R.Nos.124360&127867,November5,1997,281

SCRA330,349DeGuiav.COMELEC,G.R.No.104712,May6,1992,208SCRA420,422.
40G.R.No.130716,December9,1998,299SCRA744,citedinChavezv.NHA,infra.
41TSNoftheoralarguments,p.202.
42Id.at209.
43Sec.2.TheCongressshallprovideasystemforsecuringthesecrecyandsanctityoftheballotxxx.
44TSNoftheoralarguments,p.76.
45Chuidianv.Sandiganbayan,G.R.Nos.156383&160723,July31,2006,497SCRA327citingGinetev.

CA,G.R.No.127596,September24,1998,296SCRA38.
46Redeav.CourtofAppeals,G.R.No.146611,February6,2007,514SCRA389.
47Maraburv.Comelec,G.R.No.169513,February26,2007,516SCRA696.
48Chavezv.NationalHousingAuthority,G.R.No.164527,August15,2007,530SCRA235.
49Cabarlesv.Maceda,G.R.No.161330,February20,2007,516SCRA303.
50TSN,p.38.
51TSNofOralArguments,Vol.I,p.64.
52Rollo,pp.436467.Annex"8,"publicrespondentsComment.
53The5thand6thpreambulatoryclausesoftheJVArespectivelyprovide:

WHEREAS,TimandSmartmatichaveagreedtojointlyandseverallysubmit,asanincorporatedjoint
venture,abidtotheCOMELECfortheautomationProjectpursuanttotherulesandtermssetforth
intheRequestforProposal

WHEREAS, in the event that the bid submitted by TIM and SMARTMATIC is declared to be the
winning bid, TIM and SMARTMATIC have agreed to cause the incorporation of a joint venture
corporation(the"JVC")whichwillenterintoacontractwiththeCOMELECfortheAutomationProject.
542.1IntheeventthatCOMELECdeclaresthebidtenderedbyTIMandSMARTMATICtobethewinning

bid for the Automation Project, the parties hereto shall incorporate or cause to be incorporated, the JVC
whichshallbenamed"TIMSMARTMATICCORPRATION"oranyotheracceptablenamewhichmaybe
allowedbytheSEC.
2.2. The JVC shall be the corporate vehicle through which the joint venture shall be carried out
xxxx. The JVC shall be the entity which shall enter into a contract with the COMELEC for the
AutomationProjectofthe2010NationalElections.
2.3 The purpose of the JVC shall be to carry out and perform jointly, severally and solidarily the
obligations of TIM and SMARTMATIC arising from being declared the winning bidder in the public
biddingfortheAutomationProjectwhichobligationsarespelledoutinthe[RFP]xxx
2.4 The authorized capital stock of the JVC is initially fixed herein at xxx PHP1,300,000,000.00
dividedintoPesos:OneBillionandThreeHundredMillionsharesxxxProvidedthattheauthorized
capital stock of the JVC may be increased when so warranted xxx. 2.5 The capital contributions of
thepartiesheretototheJVCshallbeasfollows:a.TIMbyitselforthoroughitsPhilippinesubsidiary
sixtypercent(60%)ofthesharestobeissuedbytheJVCb.SMATMATIC,byitselforthroughits
Philippinesubsidiaryfortypercent(40%)ofthesharestobeissuedbytheJVC.xxx
554.1ForaslongasTIM,eitherbyitselforthroughitssubsidiary,ownsandholds60%oftheoutstanding

capitalstockoftheJVCandentitledtovote,TIMshallbeentitledtonominateandelect60%oftheBoardof
DirectorsoftheJVC.ForaslongasSMARTMATIC,eitherbyitselforthroughitsPhilippinesubsidiary,owns
and holds 40% of the outstanding capital stock of the JVC and entitled to vote, SMARTMATIC shall be
entitledtonominateandelect40%oftheBoardofDirectorsoftheJVC
56 7.1 The JVC will distribute its profits to the Shareholders to the extent determined by the Board of

Directors xxx after taking into account the financial requirements of the JVC with respect to the working
capital.xxx
573.1ForpurposesoftheAutomationProject,TIMmaycontributetotheJVCandshallberesponsiblefor

the following: a. the valueadded services pertaining or related to canvassing units, systems integration,
transmissionandsuchotherservicesasrequiredbytheAutomationProjectandasindicatedinthe[RFP]
b. services pertaining or related to logistics, deployment and manpower c. hardware, software, ballot
paper,consumablesandsuchotherservicesasmayberequestedbySMARTMATICandd.localsupport
staffasmayberequiredunderthecircumstances
3.2ForpurposesoftheAutomationProject,SMARTMATICshallcontributetotheJVCandshallbe
responsible for the following: a. the development, manufacture and/or supply of EVMs, other
machines and equipment, software, technology and systems b. overall project management as
required by the Automation Project and as indicated in the [RFP] and c. any other activity not
expresslywritteninthisAgreementorassignedtoTIM
xxxx
3.4Intheeventthe[financialandcapitalcontribution]sourcesmentionedintheprecedingArticle3,3
(b) or (c) are insufficient to meet the financial requirements of the JVC, the parties shall bear the
responsibility of supporting or securing such financial requirements in proportion to their respective
shareholdingsxxx.
58G.R.No.159139,January13,2004,419SCRA146.
59Id.at167.
60TSNoftheoralarguments,p.119.
61Sec.7.1oftheITBreads:"ThebiddershallspecifyinitsBidallportionsoftheGoodsandServicesthat

will be subcontracted, if any, including the entities to whom each portion will be subcontracted to xxx.
SubcontractingofanyportionshallnotrelievetheBidderfromanyliabilityorobligationthatmayarisefrom
itsperformance."
62Rollo,p.310.PublicrespondentsComment,p.22.

63ApprovedonJanuary23,2007,RA9369providesinitsSec.47thatitshalltakeeffect15daysafterits

publicationinanewspaperofgeneralcirculation.
64TheSenatesCommentinIntervention,p.4.
65Annex"A"[GlossaryofTerms]oftheRFP.
66Rollo,174175.PrivaterespondentsCommentonPetition,pp.2728.
67 Memorandum, Report/Recommendation on the 2010 Automation Election Project Procurement, Annex

"9,"CommentonPetitionofPublicRespondents.
68 Entitled "An Act Appropriating the Sum of Eleven Billion Three Hundred One Million Seven Hundred

Ninety Thousand Pesos (P11,301,790,000.00) as Supplemental Budget for an [AES] and for Other
Purposes."
69Rollo,p.1341.
70 On page 3 of its Comment, NCC, thru its Dir. Gen. Angelo Timoteo M. Diaz de Rivera, states: "We

believethatthesuccessfuldeploymentofthepaperbasedelectionsystemin5ofthe6provincesofARMM
andtheconcurrentdeploymentofthedirectrecordingelectronicelectionsysteminMaguindanaoprovince,
issubstantialcomplianceofthespiritofthislaw,giventheunderlyingcircumstances."
71Mr.AmadoA.Malacaman,signingassecretaryoftheITFP,states:"TheARMMelectioninAugust2008

wasnotavalidpilotrunfortworeasons:(1)Itdidnotcovertwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinces
eachinLuzon,Visayas,andMindanao,and(2)PCOSwasnotusedinthatelectoralexercise."
72Atty.Roquesaid:"ThePCOSstageissimilartoOMRbecausetheyalsohavetoshadetheovalforthe

candidatethattheywanttovote.ThedifferenceisthatintheOMRtheycollatealltheballotsxxxwherein
PCOSyoudontputitinaballot,youfeeditintothemachines."
73PublicrespondentsComment,pp.2728.
74Section5,RA8436,asamended.
75Petition,p.30.
76Id.at31.
77Annex"9,"publicrespondentsComment.
78SeeNoteNo.33.
79Annex"8,"Commentofpublicrespondents.
80TSN,pp.315316
81ThefinaltestshallbeconductedatleastthreedaysbeforeelectionafterwhichthePCOSandCCSshall

besealedforelectiondayuse(PartV,itemno.13,RFP).
82TSN,p.89.
83http://www.com/solutionsautomatedelectionssystemview/article/votingmachine.
84TSN,OralArguments,pp.455456,490.
85Rollo,pp.10621063.PetitionersMemorandum,pp.1213.
86 Sec. 2, Art. IXC SECTION 2. The [Comelec] shall exercise the following powers and functions: (1)

Enforceandadministeralllawsandregulationsrelativetotheconductofanelection,plebiscite,initiative,
referendum and recall xxx (4) Deputize xxx law enforcement agencies xxx for the exclusive purpose of
ensuringfree,orderly,honestpeacefulandcredibleelections.
87 21.1. "Contract documents" refers to the following documents and they are hereby incorporated and

madeanintegralpartofthisContract:xxxAnnex"O"RequestforProposal/TermsofReference.
88PartII,RFP.
89Rollo,p.1094.PetitionersMemorandum,p.44.
90SECTION3.Section3of[RA]8436isherebyamendedtoreadasfollows:"SEC.3BoardofElectionof

Inspectors.WhereAESshallbeadopted,atleastonememberoftheBoardofElectionInspectorsshall
bean[IT]capableperson,whoistrainedorcertifiedbytheDOSTtousesuchAES.Suchcertificationshall
beissuedbytheDOST,freeofcharge."
91 SECTION 5. Section 5 of [RA] 8436 is hereby amended to read as follows: "SEC. 4 Information

TechnologySupportfortheBoardofCanvassers. To implement the AES, each board of canvasser shall

beassistedbyan[IT]capablepersonauthorizedtooperatetheequipmentadoptedfortheelections.The
Commission shall deputize [IT] personnel from among agencies and instrumentalities of the government,
includinggovernmentownedandcontrolledcorporations.xxx"
92TSN,OralArguments,pp.203206.
93Id.at5051.
94Id.at15859.
95Id.at195200.
96Id.at17.
97CA108,asamendedbyPD715.
98Promulgatingthe7thRegularForeignInvestmentNegativeList.
99Sec.2.ofRA9369.
100Sec.10ofRA8436,asamended,statesthat"onceanAEStechnologyisselectedforimplementation,

theCommissionshallpromptlymakethesourcecodeavailableandopentoanyinterestedpartyorgroups
whichmayconducttheirownreviewthereof."
101 These include bringing PCOS2 to the precinct assigned to PCOS1 breaking seal of PCOS1 to get

precinctconfigurationandbreakingsealofPCOS2toremoveprecinctconfigurationcard.
102Rollo,p.845.
103Leyaleyv.Comelec,G.R.No.160061,October11,2006,504SCRA217.
104Sumulongv.Comelec,73Phil.288,294296(1941).
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

SEPARATECONCURRINGOPINION
PUNO,C.J.:
PrefatoryStatement
Thebroadpowertodeterminewhethertherehasbeenagraveabuseofdiscretionamountingtolackorexcess
ofjurisdictiononthepartofanybranchorinstrumentalityofthegovernment1isexercisedwithfullappreciationby
the judiciary of the proper limits of its role in our tripartite form of government. We should take care that this
expandedpowerisnotusedasalicenseforcourtstointerveneincasesinvolvingmattersofpolicywovenwith
constitutional and legal questions. Since time immemorial, courts have deferred to the wisdom or logic of
legislativechoicesandtechnicaldeterminations.Itisasitshouldbe.
By this paradigm, we do not abdicate our fundamental responsibility in annulling an act of grave abuse of
discretion in the guise of judicial restraint, but neither do we permit the overarching use of judicial power as to

amounttojudicialtyranny.
A.TheCase
The petitioners brought this case for Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus to declare that public respondents
Commission on Elections (COMELEC), and the COMELECSpecial Bids and Awards Committee (COMELEC
SBAC),committedgraveabuseofdiscretionamountingtolackorexcessofjurisdictionwhenitawardedthe2010
Automated Elections Project to private respondents Total Information Management, Inc. (TIM) and Smartmatic
International, Inc. (Smartmatic). Petitioners ask the Court to strike down as null and void the July 10, 2009
contract between public respondent COMELEC and private respondents for being contrary to the Constitution,
statutes,andestablishedjurisprudence.
OnJune7,1995,CongresspassedRepublicActNo.8046adoptinganAutomatedElectionSystem(AES)inthe
Philippines. RA 8046 authorized COMELEC to conduct a nationwide demonstration of a computerized election
systemandallowedthepollbodytopilottestthesystemintheMarch1996electionsintheAutonomousRegion
inMuslimMindanao(ARMM).
OnDecember22,1997,CongressenactedRepublicActNo.84362(RA8436),otherwiseknownasthe"Election
ModernizationAct"authorizingCOMELECtouseanAESfortheprocessofvoting,countingvotesandcanvassing
or consolidating the results of the national and local elections. It also mandated the poll body to acquire
automated counting machines (ACMs), computer equipment, devices and materials, and adopt new electoral
formsandprintingmaterials.
The COMELEC, however, was not able to implement the AES for the positions of President, Vice President,
senators and parties, organizations or coalitions participating under the partylist system throughout the entire
country, as provided in RA 8436. The automation was limited to the provinces of Lanao del Sur, Maguindanao,
Sulu,andTawitawiduetolackofmaterialtimeandfunding.
TheCOMELECwasnotalsoabletoimplementanAESintheMay2001electionsduetotimeconstraints.Buton
October29,2002,theCOMELECadoptedResolution020170,whichresolvedtoconductbiddingsforthethree
phases of the AES: Phase I, voter registration and validation system Phase II, automated counting and
canvassingsystemandPhaseIII,electronictransmission.TheCOMELECawardedPhaseIIfortheprovisionof
the ACMs to the Mega Pacific Consortium (MP Consortium). The Information Technology Foundation of the
Philippines(ITFP),amongothers,petitionedthisCourttodeclarenullandvoidtheawardofthecontracttothe
MPConsortium.InInformationTechnologyFoundationofthePhilippinesv.COMELEC,3thisCourtheldthatthe
contractwasvoidforfailuretoestablishtheidentity,existenceandeligibilityoftheallegedconsortiumasabidder
theACMsfailuretopassthetestsoftheDepartmentofScienceandTechnology(DOST)andtheACMsfailure
to meet the required accuracy rating as well as safeguards for the prevention of double counting of precinct
results.
On January 23, 2007, Congress passed Republic Act No. 9369 (RA 9369), amending RA 8436. It specified the
modes of implementing the AES, i.e., either paperbased or a direct recording electronic (DRE) system, for the
processofvoting,countingofvotesandcanvassing/consolidationandtransmittalofresultsofelectoralexercises.
It also provided that for the next election, the AES shall be used in at least two highly urbanized cities and two
provinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao.4Inaddition,itprovidedthatwithrespecttotheMay10,2010
electionsandsucceedingelectoralexercises,thesystemprocuredmusthavedemonstratedcapabilityandbeen
successfully used in a prior electoral exercise here or abroad. However, participation in the 2007 pilot exercise
shallnotbeconclusiveofthesystem'sfitness.5
Again,theAESwasnotimplementedintheMay2007electionsduetolackoffundsandtimeconstraints.Butthe
AES was used in the August 11, 2008 ARMM elections, where both DRE and the paperbased Central Count
OpticalScan(CCOS)machineswereused.
On March 5, 2009, Republic Act No. 9525 (RA 9525)6 was passed by the House of Representatives and the
Senate, appropriating the sum of Eleven Billion Three Hundred One Million Seven Hundred Ninety Thousand
Pesos(P11,301,790,000.00)foranAEStobeusedintheMay10,2010automatednationalandlocalelections.
FromMarch13to16,2009,theCOMELECpublishedandpostedaninvitationforvendorstoapplyforeligibility
andtobidfortheprocurementofcountingmachines,includingthesupplyofballotpaperelectronictransmission
services using public telecommunications networks training technical support warehousing deployment
installation pullout systems integration and overall project management to be used in the automation of the
counting, transmission and canvassing of the votes for the May 10, 2010 synchronized national and local
elections.
OnMarch18,2009,theCOMELECissuedtheTermsofReference/RequestforProposalforSolutions,Terms&
Conditions for the Automation of the May 10, 2010 Synchronized National and Local Elections (TOR/RFP), as

promulgatedinCOMELECResolution8591,datedMarch11,2009,withthefollowingcomponents:
a.Component1:PaperBasedAutomatedElectionSystem
1A.ElectionManagementSystem(EMS)
1B.PrecinctCountOpticalScan(PCOS)System
1C.Consolidated/CanvassingSystem(CCS)
b.Component2:ProvisionforElectronicTransmissionofElectronicResultsusingPublic
TelecommunicationsNetworks
c.Component3:OverallProjectManagement
OnMarch19,2009,elevenprospectivebiddersobtainedbiddocumentsfromtheCOMELECfortheautomation
ofthe2010elections.
On March 23, 2009, RA 9525 was signed by President Gloria MacapagalArroyo appropriating
P11,301,790,000.00assupplementalappropriationforanautomatedelectionssystemandotherpurposes.
On March 27, 2009, the COMELEC conducted a PreBid Conference for the automation of the counting,
transmissionandcanvassingofvotesfortheMay10,2010elections.
On April 23, 2009, TIM and Smartmatic entered into a Joint Venture Agreement (JVA) to form the joint venture
knownasSmartmaticTIMCorporation.
On May 4, 2009, seven suppliers submitted their formal bids. The COMELECSBAC declared all the seven
biddersineligibleforfailuretocomplywiththepass/failcriteriaoftheCOMELEC.Uponmotionforreconsideration
of the suppliers, three consortiums were reconsidered by the COMELECSBAC, namely Indra Consortium,
SmartmaticTIM, AMAESS and the Gilat Consortium. After evaluation of their technical proposals, the
COMELECSBACdeclaredIndraConsortiumandSmartmaticTIMtohavepassed.
TheCOMELECSBACthenproceededwiththeopeningofthefinancialproposals.TheTechnicalWorkingGroup
(TWG) evaluated and reviewed the financial proposals of Indra Consortium and SmartmaticTIM. On June 3,
2009,theCOMELECSBACrecommendedtotheCOMELECenbanctheawardoftheContractfortheProvision
of an Automated Election System for the May 10, 2010 Synchronized National and Local Elections (Automation
Contract) to the joint venture of SmartmaticTIM. SmartmaticTIM was found to have the lowest calculated
responsive bid (LCRB) and to have passed all the eligibility, technical, and financial requirements. The
COMELECSBAC noted that SmartmaticTIMs machines passed all the tests and systems evaluation with an
accuracy rating of 100%. This finding was verified and validated in the postqualification proceedings. The total
bid of SmartmaticTIM amounting to Seven Billion One Hundred Ninetyone Million Four Hundred Eightyfour
Thousand Seven Hundred Thirtynine and 48/100 Philippine pesos (P7,191,484,739.48) was found by the
COMELECtobewithintheapprovedbudgetforthecontractofElevenBillionTwoHundredTwentythreeMillion
SixHundredEighteenThousandFourHundredand0/100Philippinepesos(P11,223,618,400.00).7
OnJune8,2009,theCOMELECAdvisoryCouncil8submitteditsobservationsontheprocurementproceedingsof
the SBAC, with the conclusion that these were transparent and in conformity with the law and the TOR/RFP. It
notedthatSmartmaticTIMhada100%accuracyrating.TheAdvisoryCouncilhasthemandatetoparticipateas
nonvotingmembersoftheCOMELECSBACintheconductofthebiddingprocessfortheAES.
Onthesamedate,June8,2009,theOfficeoftheOmbudsman,whichhadpreviouslycreatedTaskForce"Poll
Automation",9 submitted its "Process Audit Observation Report." The Ombudsman Task Force also found the
aboveproceedingsandsystemstobeconsonantwiththeConstitution,procurementlaws,andRA9369.
The Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting (PPCRV) representative likewise submitted a report, which
concurredwiththefinalreportoftheCOMELECSBAC.
OnJune9,2009,theCOMELECenbancpromulgatedResolutionNo.8608,confirmingSmartmaticTIMasthe
bidderwiththeLCRBandawardingthecontractfortheautomationoftheelectionsonMay10,2010tothejoint
venture.
On June 10, 2009, the COMELEC awarded the contract to SmartmaticTIM to supply 82,000 Precinct Count
OpticalScan(PCOS)machinestobeusedinthe2010elections.Subsequently,JoseMariAntuez,thePresident
of TIM, informed COMELEC Chairperson Jose Melo that TIM was withdrawing from the partnership with
Smartmatic,duetoirreconcilabledifferencesandlossofconfidence.ThescheduledsigningonJune30,2009of
the Automation Contract between COMELEC, Smartmatic and TIM did not take place. Following a series of

discussions,SmartmaticandTIMwereabletosettletheirinternaldispute.
SmartmaticandTIMthencausedtheincorporationoftheirjointventure,pursuanttotheJVA.OnJuly8,2009,the
SecuritiesandExchangeCommission(SEC)issuedaCertificateofIncorporationtoSmartmaticTIMCorporation.
OnJuly10,2009,theSmartmaticTIMCorporationenteredintotheAutomationContractwiththeCOMELEC.The
contractpricewasP7,191,484,739.48.
Thepetitionatbarraisesthefollowing
B.Issues
1. Whether RA 8436, as amended by RA 9369, requires the conduct of a pilot exercise as a condition
precedenttothefullnationwideautomationoftheelection.
2.WhetherRA9525hasimpliedlyrepealedthepilottestingrequirement.
3.WhetherSmartmaticandTIMenteredintoavalidjointventureagreement.
4.Whetheranynationalityrequirementisapplicable.
5.WhethertheAESchosenbytheCOMELECcomplieswiththe"priorsuccessfuluse"qualificationsetforth
inSection12ofRA8436,asamended.
6. Whether the PCOS machines offered by the SmartmaticTIM Consortium satisfy the minimum system
capabilitiesmandatedbySection6ofRA8436,asamended.
C.Discussion
A touchstone of our Constitution is that critical public policy judgments belong to the legislative branch, and the
Courtmustnotundulyintrudeintothisexclusivedomain.
InenactingRA8436(ElectionModernizationAct)onDecember22,1997,thelegislaturehasclearlychosenthe
policy that an AES shall be used by the COMELEC for the process of voting, counting of votes and
canvassing/consolidationofresultsofthenationalandlocalelections.10 It decided to put an end to the manual
conductofourelectionsthathasfrustratedthehonestcastingofvotesbyoursovereignpeople.
Inthepursuitofitsobjective,thelegislaturedefinedwhatitconsideredanAESandprovidedthestandardsforits
implementation. It further determined the minimum functional capabilities of the system and delegated to the
COMELEC the development and adoption of a system of evaluation to ascertain that the minimum system
capabilitieswouldbemet.
The policy decision of Congress to adopt an AES is not under question. It is the manner the COMELEC is
implementing the AES that is assailed by the petitioners. The first issue is whether the conduct of an AES in at
leasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanaoisaconditionprecedent
tothenationwideimplementationoftheAES.
c.1TheconductofthepilotexerciseoftheAESisaconditionprecedenttoitsnationwideimplementation
Whether the conduct of the pilot exercise of the AES is a condition precedent to its nationwide implementation
involvesthecorrectinterpretationofSection5ofRA8436.TheinterpretationofSection5,RA8436,asamended,
isnothinglessthanabraintwister.ItappearslikeaRorschachinkblottest,inwhichpetitionersandrespondents
assign meaning to certain words as though they were deciphering images formed by inkblots. Using the same
wordofthelaw,theyarriveatdifferentconclusions.
Thus,thepetitionersinterpretthewordshallinthefirstprovisoofSection5,RA8436,asamended,tosupport
theirthesisthatthepilotexerciseoftheAESisaconditionprecedentpriortoitsfullimplementation.Theproviso
statesthat"the[automatedelectionsystem]shallbeusedinatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinces
eachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao."11
Similarly, the respondents interpret the word shall in the last sentence of the provision, which states that "in
succeeding regular national or local elections, the [automated election system] shall be implemented
nationwide,"12andsubmitthatthepilotexerciseoftheAESisnotaconditionprecedent.Further,theycontend
that the use of the AES in at least two provinces and two highly urbanized cities each in Luzon, Visayas and
MindanaorefersonlytothenationalandlocalelectionsimmediatelyfollowingthepassageofRA9369,i.e.,the
May2007nationalandlocalelections.TheyarguethatthiswasjustanacknowledgmentbyCongressthatthere
wasnotenoughtimeorfundstoconductafullnationwideautomationoftheMay2007election.

TherespondentsreadingofSection5disregardsthetenoroftheentireprovision.Arationalreadingoftheentire
provisionwillshowthatthedifferentpartsisolatedandtheninterpretedbytherespondentsareconnectedbythe
conjunctions provided, that and provided, further that and provided, finally that. These conjunctions signify that
theclausesthatfollowtheconjunctionareaprerequisiteoraconditiontothefulfillmentofthepreviousclause.
Thewordsprovided,thatmeanthesameas"aslongas,""inorderthat,"and"ifonly."Thus,theprovisionshould
bereadandunderstoodasfollows:
Part1:Tocarryouttheabovestatedpolicy,theCommissiononElections,hereinreferredtoasthe
Commission, is hereby authorized to use an automated election system or systems in the same
electionindifferentprovinces,whetherpaperbasedoradirectrecordingelectronicelectionsystem
as it may deem appropriate and practical for the process of voting, counting of votes and
canvassing/consolidationandtransmittalofresultsofelectoralexercises:13
Provided,That
Part2:fortheregularnationalandlocalelections,whichshallbeheldimmediatelyaftertheeffectivity
of this Act, the AES shall be used in at least two highly urbanized cities and two provinces each in
Luzon,VisayasandMindanao,tobechosenbytheCommission:
Provided,further,
Part3:Thatlocalgovernmentunitswhoseofficialshavebeenthesubjectofadministrativecharges
withinsixteen(16)monthspriortotheMay14,2007electionsshallnotbechosen:
Providedfinally,
Part4:ThatnoareashallbechosenwithouttheconsentoftheSanggunianofthelocalgovernment
unit concerned. The term local government unit as used in this provision shall refer to a highly
urbanizedcityorprovince.
Part5:Insucceedingregularnationalorlocalelections,theAESshallbeimplementednationwide.14
Inthislight,Section5shouldbeinterpretedtomeanthattheCOMELECisauthorizedtouseanAESaslongas
the following requisites are complied with: (1) for the regular national and local elections, which shall be held
immediatelyaftertheeffectivityoftheAct,theAESshallbeusedinatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwo
provinces each in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao (2) that local government units whose officials have been the
subjectofadministrativechargeswithinsixteenmonthspriortotheMay14,2007electionsshallnotbechosen
and (3) that no area shall be chosen without the consent of the Sanggunian of the local government unit
concerned. And, when the above conditions are complied with, the AES shall be implemented nationwide in
succeedingregularnationalandlocalelections.
Thelastsentenceoftheprovisionwhichprovidesthat"[i]nsucceedingregularnationalorlocalelections,theAES
shallbeimplementednationwide"mayappearasnotconnectedtotheenumerationofrequirementsfortheuse
ofanAES.Butthisdoesnotmeanthatitcanbereadinisolationandindependentlyfromtherestoftheprovision.
Section5expresslydeclaresthattheCOMELEC'sauthoritytousetheAESonanationwidescaleiscontingenton
the prior conduct of partial automation in two provinces and two highly urbanized cities each in Luzon, Visayas
andMindanao.
Likewise,theword"pilottesting"maynothavebeenusedintheprovision,buttheintenttotesttheuseofanAES
is evident in its text. The mandatory nature of the initial conduct of an automated election in two provinces and
twohighlyurbanizedcitieseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanaoishighlightedbytheuseofthewordshall.That
thisisaconditionprecedentbeforeafullnationwideautomatedelectioncanbeusedinthesucceedingelections
isbuttressedbytheuseofthewordsprovided,that.Thus,theCOMELECisauthorizedtouseanAES,provided
thattheAESisfirstusedintwoprovincesandtwohighlyurbanizedcitieseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao,
afterwhich,inthefollowingregularnationalandlocalelections,theAESshallbeimplementednationwide.
Pushing to the limit their argument that pilot testing is not a condition precedent to the conduct of an AES, the
respondentsrelyonSection12ofRA8436,asamended,whichprovidesthus:
SEC. 12. Procurement of Equipment and Materials. To achieve the purpose of this Act, the Commission is
authorized to procure, in accordance with existing laws, by purchase, lease, rent or other forms of acquisition,
supplies, equipment, materials, software, facilities and other services, from local or foreign sources free from
taxes and import duties, subject to accounting and auditing rules and regulations. With respect to the May 10,
2010electionsandsucceedingelectoralexercises,thesystemprocuredmusthavedemonstratedcapabilityand
beensuccessfullyusedinapriorelectoralexercisehereorabroad.Participationinthe2007pilotexerciseshall
notbeconclusiveofthesystem'sfitness.(Emphasissupplied)

TherespondentspressthepointthatSection12,supra,indicatesthatpilottestingintheMay2007electionsis
not a mandatory requirement for the choice of an AES to be used in the May 2010 elections, nor is it a
prerequisiteforthefullautomationoftheMay2010elections,sincethesystemscapabilitymayhavebeenused
in an electoral exercise abroad. Respondents also contend that since participation in the 2007 pilot exercise is
expresslydeclaredasinconclusiveofthesystemsfitness,thenthenonuseofthePCOSmachinesinthe2007
electoralexerciseisnotabartotheimplementationofafullnationwideautomationinthe2010elections.
With due respect, the respondents have a murky understanding of the last sentence of Section 12. It merely
statesthat"[p]articipationinthe2007pilotexerciseshallnotbeconclusiveofthesystem'sfitness."Itdoesnotsay
that participation of the procured system in the 2007 pilot exercise is not a condition precedent to the full
nationwide implementation of the AES. The section says in unadorned language that as long as the system
procured presumably for the May 2007 elections has been shown to have demonstrated capability and has
been successfully used in a prior electoral exercise here in the Philippines or abroad, the system may also be
used in the May 2010 and succeeding elections. In fine, the subject of the section is the fitness of the system
procuredfortheMay2007automatedpilotexerciseithasnorelationtotheissueofwhetherthepilotexerciseis
aconditionprecedenttotheimplementationoffullnationwideautomatedelections.
The deliberations of the Joint Congressional Oversight Committee on [the] Automated Election System (Joint
CommitteeonAES)15shouldfurtherenlightenusonthepurposeofthelastsentenceinSection12ofRA8436,
asamended:that"[p]articipationinthe2007pilotexerciseshallnotbeconclusiveofthesystem'sfitness."They
revealthatthepurposeissimplytoavoidasituationinwhichthechoicesofmachinesandthekindofAEStobe
usedinthe2010electionswouldbelimitedtothosethatwerepilotedinthe2007elections.
Thus,SenatorRichardGordonexplainedthatthepurposebehindthestatementthatparticipationinthe2007pilot
exerciseswasnotconclusiveofthesystemsfitnesswastoensurethatnewlydevelopedtechnologymaystillbe
considered for the 2010 elections, even though it was not tested in the 2007 pilot exercise. Representative
TeodoroLocsinconcurredinthesameview.Thus:
THE CHAIRMAN (SEN. GORDON). Precisely that was placed there so that you can get newly discovered
machinesornewlyinventedmachinesthatcanbeutilizedsothatinthe2010electionsitwouldhavebeentriedin
anexamplehereinourcountry.
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).Ithinkthepurposeofthiswasanybidderwhocanproveandwhohasalready
carried out an electoral exercise sure, of course, he has a leg up of all other but thats not conclusive which
assumesthatotherswhohavenotthesameexperiencewillbeallowedtoalsobid.(Emphasissupplied.)16
RepresentativeLocsinelucidatedthatparticipationinthepilotexercisewasnotconclusiveofthesystemsfitness,
becausepilotswereeasiertodothannationalexercises.Thiswasalsotoemphasizethatthosewhoparticipated
in the pilot exercise were not to be preferred over those who were not able to participate in the pilot exercise.
Thus:
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).Althoughthisisadetail,ifImayno,Ithinkyouarejustdoingyourbestthatyou
justreadwhatitsays.Itsimplysaysthat,Ithink,everyoneisentitledtoputtheirbid.Your(sic)havethediscretion
todecidewhetherornottheyhavethecapability.AcompanymayhavehadmanyexercisesinLatinAmericabut
for this particular exercise they may not be prepared to deploy the best then we just forget it. But when it says
"participationin2007pilotexerciseshallnotbeconclusive,"thatdoesnotmeantoexcludeanyonewhodidnot
participatein2007.Itwasonlymeanttosayourfearisthatsomebodymaybesogoodinthepilotbutthenhell
say,"Hey,Iwonthepilotthereforeyouhavetogivemethenationalelection."Thatsallitmeantbecausepilots
arealwayseasiertodothannationalexercises.(Emphasissupplied.)17
Therespondentsalsohaveanerroneousreadingoftheuseoftheword"pilotexercise"insteadof"pilottesting."
They claim that the use of the word "pilot exercise" instead of "pilot testing" is indicative of the intention to only
initially use or employ the AES in the 2007 elections rather than make it a condition precedent. Again, this
submission is not sustained by the deliberations of the Senate. "Pilotexercise" was used in the law instead of
"pilottest"toavoidthenotionthatatestmustfirstbepassedinthe2007electionsinordertocontinuewiththe
useoftheAESasamodeofconductingthesucceedingelections.Thelawmakerswantedtoavoidtheuseofthe
word "test," so that in case the AES to be used in the 2007 elections did not well perform as planned, still, the
automation of the elections in the next elections would proceed. This intent is reflected in the debate between
Senator Richard J. Gordon (Senator Gordon) and Senator Manuel A. Roxas II (Senator Roxas) over an
amendmenttoSection5ofRA8436,proposedbythelatter.SenatorRoxasproposedtoaddthewords"onatest
basis"torefertotheuseofanAES.Theamendmentisasfollows:
Section 5. Authority to Use an Automated Election System. To carry out the abovestated policy, the
CommissiononElections,hereinreferredtoastheCOMELECisherebyauthorizedtouseONATESTBASISAN
automatedelectionsystemxxx.18(capitalizationintheoriginal.)

Senator Roxas wanted to use the word "test," so that after a "test" of the AES in the 2007 elections, Congress
wouldknowwhethertheimplementationofthe2007nationalandlocalAESwassuccessful.Thereafter,Congress
would decide whether the AES as a mode of conducting elections should still be used for the successive
elections.ThisisclearfromthefollowingexchangeofremarksbetweenSenatorRoxasandSenatorGordon:
SENATOR ROXAS. In any event, Mr. President, I would like now to go to line 18 and read into the Record the
proposedamendment.Again,asIsaidearlier,soasnottoconfusethosewhoarefollowingthelanguage,Iwill
deliberately not read the word "test" subject to whatever happens to that word in subsequent debate and
dialogue.
Theproposedamendmentreads:
THE FURTHER IMPLEMENTATION OF AN AES OR AES TECHNOLOGY SHALL BE DECIDED
UPONBYCONGRESS,THROUGHAJOINTRESOLOUTION,UPONRECOMMENDATIONOFTHE
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE. FOR THIS PURPOSE, THE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE SHALL
CONDUCT COMPREHENSIVE EVALUATION PERFORMANCE OF SAID AES OR AES
TECHNOLOGYDURINGINITIALIMPLEMENTATIONOFRESULTSWITHMANUALTABULATION.IT
SHALL THEN MAKE APPROPRIATE RECOMMENDATIONS TO CONGRESS ON WHETHER ANY
FURTHERIMPLEMENTATIONSHALLBECONDUCTEDOROTHERWISE.INCASEOFFURTHER
IMPLEMENTATION AND THE INCREMENTAL COVERAGE BY ALL AES SHALL NOT BE MORE
THANTENPERCENT(10%)OFTHETOTALCOVERAGEINTERMSOFNUMBEROFDISTRICTS.
That is the proposed amendment, Mr. President. The proposed amendment, first, from a comprehensive
perspective seeks to revert back to Congress the judgment whether the implementation of the AES in 2007
nationalandlocalelectionswassuccessfulornot.
As envisaged in the bill, Mr. President, we are leaving to the Comelec the decision to choose the appropriate
technology that will be implemented. There will be a series of advisory or a number of advisory and TAHEC
bodiesthatwillhopefullyinformthatdecision.
xxxx
SENATOR GORDON. I thank the distinguished gentleman from Capiz, Mr. President. I know he tried to amend
thiswithsincerity,butIalsowouldliketomaintainthatthisisnotatest,firstandforemost,becausehespeaksof
atest,andIknowhehasalreadystatedwhatwordtouse.AsIpointedout,thewordstobeusedshouldbe:The
AutomatedElectionSystemwillbeimplementedintheprovincehehasalreadyspokenabout.
But,upontheotherhand,Iamconcernedabout"shallbedecideduponbyCongressthroughajointresolution,"
referring to line 18,before the implementation of an AES. I am removing the word "test", "before the
implementationofAEStechnologyshallbedecideduponbyCongress."
Mr.President,thatlinespeaksvolumes.Themotherbillthatweareamendingwhichisenactedin1987decideda
policy that we are going to go on an automated election. In other words, if we follow the logic here, we are
practicallysaying:"Well,wemaybechangingourmind.Maybewearenotinautomationmodeagain."Thisvery
line suggests and clearly states that: "Hey, it is going to go back to Congress." And, in fact, through a joint
resolution, which I think cannot even be done because Congress amends even without this suggestion. It can
amend even without these lines. It can amend the law if it chooses to do so. Which means that after the
AutomatedElectionSystem,ifwefeelthatwenolongerwanttohaveanautomatedelectionsystem,Congress
cannotatanytimesay:"No,wearenolongerinthatmode."
Whatourbillprovidesisthatwearealreadyonthisheuristicnotion,ifImayuseawordIlearnedinschoolalong
timeago,whichisatrajectorythatisheadedtowardsaparticulardirectionaimedatmodernizingtheelectionby
wayofAES.Andwehaveputinthesafeguardstheminimumrequirementsandbysodoing,aftertheelectionhas
been conducted, the Comelec which is the agency, whether we like it or not, that has been mandated by the
Constitutiontorunourelectionssimplygoesonandsays:"Allright,wewillexpandupontherecommendationof
theAES,alongwiththeoversightcommittee."
Now,ifthatisthecase,Mr.President,thereisnoneedtogobacktoCongress.ButifCongressseesitfit,asI
pointedout,wearenotobviatingthatpossibility.IfCongressseesitfit,theycanamendit.
ButasfarasIamconcerned,Ithinktheruleshouldbethatweareonanautomatedruleshouldbethatweare
onanautomatedelectionmodeandweshouldnotsaycontinueonwithit.
ButasfarasIamconcerned,Ithinktheruleshouldbethatweareonanautomatedelectionmodeandweare
on an automated election more and we should continue on with it. But we should not say after the exercise,
paranglumalabasnatest,wewillnowgobackanddecidewhetherwearestillonanautomatedelectionmode
andsaywemightbegoingbacktomanual.xxxWehavedebatedontheautomated,wepassedthisonthepast

periodofdebateandwehavealreadydecidedthatwearecontinuingwiththetrajectoryofautomatedelection.I
would not want to go back again to a situation where Congress will say, "We are changing his (sic) mind."
Although,itiswithinitsprerogativeanywayatanytime.(Emphasissuppliedcapitalizationintheoriginal.)19
SenatorRoxasamendmentwhichcontainedtheword"test,"wasrejected.Thereasonisnotbecausethepartial
useoftheAESinthe2007electionwasnotconsideredasaconditionprecedenttoitsfullimplementationinthe
2010 elections. Rather, it was because the use of the word "test" would have implied that Congress would still
have to decide whether the conduct of the AES had passed its requirements whether an AES should still be
continuedinthesucceedingelectionsorwhether,basedonthe"test,"theconductoftheelectionsshouldrevert
tomanual.
SenatorGordonfurthermadeitclearthatthereasonwhytheAESshouldfirstbeimplementedincertainpartsof
the country and not immediately throughout the entire country was that "a big bite must not be taken right
away."20 The implementation of the system must be done in phases: first, it must be piloted in parts of the
Philippines, and only then can it be implemented nationwide. This is reflected in the following statement of
SenatorGordon:
SENATORGORDON.xxxx
Mr.President,thisispreciselywhywearestartingtheautomationintwoprovincesandtwocitiessothatwedo
nottakeabigbiterightaway.AndIacceptedtheamendmentoftheMinorityLeaderpreciselybecausewewant
to make sure that the bite is sufficiently enough for us to be able to run the automation. x x x We trust the
ComelecbutweverifythesystembecausewearehamstrungbytheconstitutionalprovisionthattheComelecis
theonethatisprincipallyinchargeofrunningtheelections,butatthesametime,wehaveanAdvisoryCouncil,
composedofourexperts,toguidethem.(Emphasissupplied)21
xxxx
Now,thesampleisonlytwoprovincesandtwocities,Mr.President,sothatwewouldbeabletogetagauge.xx
x(Emphasissupplied)22
xxxSo,itisreallyanautomatedsystemthatweadvocateand,obviously,thetwoprovincesandtwocitiesfor
Luzon,VisayasandMindanaowillbetheinitialapproachtowardsthiseffort.Sothatwhenwegoandexpandin
the next elections in 2010, based on the Oversight Committee and based on the Congress itself, if we want to
amenditagain,wecandoso.(Emphasissupplied)23
Insum,bothfromthewordsofRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369,anditslegislativeintent,itisclearthatanAES
shallbeconductedandthattheCOMELECisauthorizedtoimplementtheAES,providedthatitisinitiallypiloted
intwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao.
c.2Bethatasitmay,theenactmentofRA9525hasimpliedlyrepealedthePilotExerciseRequirement
In a shift in stance, it is argued by the respondents that RA 8436, which requires that a piloting of the AES be
usedinatleasttwoprovincesandtwohighlyurbanizedcitieseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanaobeforeafull
nationwideautomationoftheelectionscanbeconducted,hasbeenimpliedlyrepealedbytheenactmentofalater
law,RA9525.TheyproffertheviewthatRA9525,24appropriatingP11,301,790,000.00fortheconductofanAES
intheMay10,2010,isforthefullimplementationofautomatedelectionsin2010.TheyarguethatwhenRA9525
was enacted on March 5, 2009, Congress was aware that there was no pilot exercise conducted in two highly
urbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanaoanddespitethisfailure,Congressstill
appropriated the entire amount of P11,301,790,000.00 for the full nationwide implementation of the AES in the
May 2010 elections. By the enactment of the P11,301,790,000.00 supplemental appropriation, the respondents
claim that Congress conveyed the intention to proceed with full nationwide automation and do away with the
requirementofconductingapilotexercise.TherespondentsalsorelyonthedeliberationsoftheSenateandthe
HouseofRepresentativestosupporttheirthesis.
Ontheotherhand,thepetitionerscounterthattherewasnoimpliedrepealoftherequirementofpilottestingof
theAESintwoprovincesandtwohighlyurbanizedcitieseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao.TheyciteSection
2ofRA9525,viz.:
Section2.UseofFunds.Theamountshereinappropriatedshallbeusedforthepurposesindicatedandsubject
to: (i) the relevant special and general provisions of Republic Act No. 9498, or the FY 2008 General
AppropriationsAct,asreenacted,andsubsequentGeneralAppropriationsActs,and(ii)theapplicableprovisions
ofRepublicActNo.8436,entitled:"AnActAuthorizingtheCommissiononElectionstoUseanAutomatedElection
SystemintheMay11,1998NationalorLocalElectionsandinsubsequentNationalandLocalElectoralExercises,
ProvidingFundsThereforandforOtherPurposes",asamendedbyRepublicActNo.9369:Provided, however,
That disbursement of the amounts herein appropriated or any part thereof shall be authorized only in strict

compliancewiththeConstitution,theprovisionsofRepublicActNo.9369andotherelectionlawsincorporatedin
saidActsoastoensuretheconductofafree,orderly,clean,honestandcredibleelectionandshalladoptsuch
measures that will guaranty transparency and accuracy in the selection of the relevant technology of the
machinestobeusedonMay10,2010automatednationalandlocalelection.(Emphasissupplied.)
ThepetitionersstressthatSection2providesthattheamountappropriatedshallbeusedfortheimplementation
oftheMay2010automatedelections,subjecttotheapplicableprovisionsofRA8436,asamended.Theyfurther
emphasize that Section 2 states that the disbursement of the amount appropriated or any part thereof shall be
doneonlyinstrictcompliancewiththeConstitution,andtheprovisionsofRA9369andotherelectionlaws.Thus,
the petitioners conclude that the mandatory requirement of pilot testing was not repealed but reiterated by
Congressinsaidsection.
Thepetitionersfurtherarguethatimpliedrepealsarenotfavored,andtwolawsmustbeabsolutelyincompatible
beforeaninferenceofimpliedrepealmaybedrawn.TheycontendthatRA9525isnottotallyinconsistentwiththe
requirementofpilottestinginSection5ofRA8436,asamended,suchthattheprovisionsofRA9525mustbe
interpretedandbroughtintoaccordwiththeoldlaw.
To resolve this issue of implied repeal, the Court must first determine whether it was the intent of Congress to
pushthroughwithfullnationwideautomationoftheelectionsinMay2010.RA9525isunclearwhetherCongress
appropriatedP11,301,790,000.00fortheconductoffullorpartialautomatedelections,orwhetheritintendedthe
automated elections to be conducted nationwide or only in the pilot areas. To clear this uncertainty, the Court
shouldresorttothedeliberationsoftheSenateandtheHouseofRepresentatives,aswellasthehearingsofthe
JointCommitteeonAES.
Let us first look at the deliberations of the House of Representatives when it considered House Bill 5715 (HB
5715), entitled "An Act Appropriating the Sum of Eleven Billion, Three Hundred One Million, Seven Hundred
Ninety Thousand Pesos as Supplemental Appropriations for an Automated Election System and for Other
Purposes.Fromthedeliberations,theassumptionofthemembersoftheHouseofRepresentativeswhoengaged
in the debate was that the appropriation was for a full nationwide implementation of the AES in the May 2010
elections.
Thus,inthesponsorshipspeechofRepresentativeJunieCuaoftheLoneDistrictofQuirino,hestatedthatthe
appropriationwasforthefullnationwideautomationoftheMay2010elections,viz.:
REP.CUA.xxxx
For your consideration, my dear esteemed colleagues, I have the privilege of submitting the budget of the
CommissiononElectionsfortheautomationofthe2010nationalandlocalelections.
OutofthebudgetproposalofP11.3B,theCOMELECisproposingtospendaboutP8.2Bfortheleaseofelection
automation equipment. This will cover the cost of 80,000 Precinct Count Optical Scanners or PCOS that will be
deployedthroughoutthecountry.Thesedeviceswillcounthandmarkedballotsthatwillbeprintedonballotpaper
costing a total of P1B. We will be spending about P78B on ballot boxes. Once the ballots are so counted, the
resultswillthenbeelectronicallytransmittedtothepublicquickerthananyquickcountinourelectionhistoryand
forthis,weneedP400M.
And finally P1.7B, more or less, will then be spent to ensure that everything goes smoothly through the strong
projectmanagementandassociatedservicesthattheCOMELECwillputinplace.(Emphasissupplied.)25
xxxx
As AKBAYAN Partylist Representative Risa HontiverosBaraquel (Representative HontiverosBaraquel) was
asking clarificatory questions to Representative Junie Cua, she also stated that the appropriation was for the
conductoftheautomatedelectionsoftheentirecountryandnotmerelyaregiontherein,viz.:
REP.HONTIVEROSBARAQUEL.xxxx
In the budget breakdown presented by the COMELEC in our committee hearing, the amount for operating
expenseswasP50million,whichisonlyequaltotheoperatingexpensesfortheARMMelections.And,sincethis
wouldbeanationalelections,notjustinoneregionofourcountry,Iaskedthen,"Shouldnttheamountbemore
inthevicinityofoneoroneandahalfbillionpesos?"Thereispartoftheresponsewasintheremarkscolumn
of the COMELEC, where they noted that some of the operating expenses, the transmission costs, would be
carriedbypublicTELCOS.(Emphasissupplied.)xxx
xxxx
REP.CUA.Yes,Mr.Speaker,afterconsultingwiththetechnicalpeopleofthecommission,Iunderstandthatthe

Ladyiscorrectthatwhatwasoriginallyallocatedforoperatingcostortransmissioncostwas50million.Butafter
reevaluating the cost breakdown, they have increased this to 200 million, Mr. Speaker, Your Honor. Yes, 200
million,Mr.Speaker.26(Emphasissupplied)
HB 5715 was approved on the third reading, with 193 members of the House of Representatives voting in the
affirmative,onevotinginthenegative,andoneabstention.
WehavealsoexaminedthedeliberationsoftheSenatewhichconstituteditselfintoaCommitteeoftheWholeto
considerHB5715.Thedebatesconfirmedthatthesenatorswerealsooftheunderstandingthattheappropriation
ofP11.3billionwasforthefullnationwideautomationoftheMay2010elections.
In the same vein, the members of the Joint Committee on AES took it as a given that the May 2010 elections
wouldbeimplementedthroughouttheentirecountry.TheSeptember1,2008hearingoftheJointCommitteeon
AES took up the COMELEC evaluation report on the automated elections held in the ARMM. Senator Loren
LegardaaskedtheChairpersonoftheCOMELECAdvisoryCouncil,Mr.RayAnthonyRoxasChuaIII,regarding
thecleansingofthelistofvotersintheprocessofdoingso,sheassumedthatthe2010electionsweretobefull
automated.Thus:
SEN.LEGARDA.xxxx
Sotherefore,ifIunderstandcorrectly,thecleansingofthevoterslistthroughtheenactmentofanewlawandthe
funding from Congress is essential because it is a partner towards the automation, complete automation, by
2010.Isthatcorrect?(Emphasissupplied.)27
RepresentativeEdcelLagmanheldthesameassumption,asheaskedthefollowingquestion:
REP. LAGMAN. Mr. Chairman, how many machines and allied equipment do you need for the nationwide
implementationoftheautomationby2010?(Emphasissupplied.)28
During the September 9, 2008 hearing of the Joint Committee on AES, Senator Edgardo Angara had an
exchange with Chairman Melo. It was unmistakable from the exchange that not only did the Congress
contemplate a full nationwide automation of the May 2010 elections, but also that the approval of a budget of
P11.3billionwasmeantfortheconductofafullnationwideautomationofthe2010elections,andnotapartialor
apilotoftheAESinselectedareas.
SEN.ANGARA.Mr.Chairman,yesterdaytheFinanceCommitteeoftheSenatestartedthebudgethearing.So,in
theSenatewearealreadybeginningtodothat.
NowletmejustaskbeforeIsaysomethingmore.HasthebudgetoftheComelecbeenheardintheHouse?
MR.MELO.Notyet.
SEN. ANGARA. Good! Good, good, because that is your window of opportunity. Youve got to catch the House
hearingonthebudgetbecauseitsbetterthatyourproposedbudgetfortheelectionsof2010areincorporatedin
the House itself. Of course, we can supplement it in the Senate but, as you know, the Senate cannot tap the
PresidentsBudget.SoitsbetterthatwenegotiateitintheHouse.
The presentation yesterday by the Budget Secretary is you will have about 3.8B for 2010. And the 3.8B, billion
(sic),alsoincludesregistration,etcetera,etceterasoitdoesnotexclusivelyAndwhenweasked,"Isthisenough
forfullautomation?"SecretaryAndayawasfrankenough."No,no.Thisisthefigurethattheysubmittedtousfour
yearsagoandwearereallyexpectingasubmissionofarevisedcostofcomputerization."
ThisiswhyIthinkyoumustseizetheopportunity.AndIwouldsuggestverystronglythattheadvisorycommittee
sit down with potential bidders and really go over every single figure in that costing because its going to be
unfortunatethatthiswillnotpushthrough.Automationwillnotpushthroughsimplybecauseitssoexpensivethat
therellbesuchahugepublicoutcryagainstit.Whereas,youandIknowthatthismaybeonegoodwaytohave
clean elections and speedier results announced in our country. Thats why I think its very important that you
bargainhardandIhopethatthesupplierswillseealsothepublicserviceelementinthisexperimentthatIhope
they wont even cut a profit out of this transaction because if you are successful, I think this will be one of the
biggestuseoftheirtechnologyat45millionor35millionvoters.Idontknowiftheresanyothercountrywhohas
thatnumberofvotersusingthisparticulartechnology.
So,intermsofsellingpoint,thiswillbeoneoftheirstrongestsellingpoints.SoIurgetherepresentativesofthe
vendorstoconsiderthatverystronglyeveniftheyhavetodonateasubstantialportionofthatcostforthesakeof
democracy,diba?29(Emphasissupplied.)
Indeed, several times during the hearings of the Joint Committee on AES, the members pointed out that full

nationwideelectionswouldbeconductedonMay10,2010,viz.:
MR.TOLENTINO.30Yes,Sir.
The costing here would be the purchased (sic) price. And if we base it on the rate that we sued for the ARMM
elections,theleasecostwouldbe70percentofthetotalbudget.
THECHAIRMAN(SEN.GORDON).Well,IgotthrownoffbecausethereisanallegationmadebyMr.Dizonthat
saysthattheycanmakeitfor14toP18billion,isthatcorrect?
MR.DIZON.Yes,Mr.Chairman.
THECHAIRMAN(SEN.GORDON).DREmachines
MR.DIZON.Yes,Mr.Chairman.
THECHAIRMAN(SEN.GORDON).fortheentirecountry,right?
MR.DIZON.Yes,Mr.Chairman.Thatsapproximately37millionvoters.31(Emphasissupplied.)
IntheMarch4,2009hearing:
THE CHAIRMAN (SEN. ESCUDERO). The only thing I am raising this (sic), Mr. Chairman, is without violating
interchamber courtesies, we are talking here of 40, nearly 50 million voters and you are transmitting a vote
locatedthousandsofkilometersawayinanareawearenotevensureifthereissignal,dahilkungwalaibababa
ho physically iyong balota mula duon sa presinto para dalhin o maglalagay kayo ng satellite, hindi ko ho alam
kunganoanggagawinninyo,walapahotayodoon.xxxSo,please,bearwithusasyourOversightCommittee
attemptstosiftthroughallofthesevariousinputsandinformationandtrytofindsomerhymeorreasonintoitand
justifyperhapsouractionoftheproposedfullautomationforthe2010elections.xxx(Emphasissupplied.)
xxxx
THE CHAIRMAN (SEN. ESCUDERO). And as final point, Mr. Chair, I would like to make of record what we
discussed.Kindlyalsolookintothepossibility,Mr.Chairman,fullyautomatedtayo,OMRkayo,asyouproposed,
but in addition to electronic transmission, cant we have an OMR at the provincial level to count the ERs to be
producedbyourOMRsattheprecinctorcollapsedprecinctleveleitherOMRthatcancountERorOMRthatcan
countanencryptedCDfromthePCOSlocatedinthecollapsedprecinctsothatyouwillhaveahardcopyofthe
ERattheprovinciallevelwhichyoucaneasilyadoptonceyougotothesite?xxx32(Emphasissupplied.)
SoitwasduringtheFebruary2,2009hearingoftheSenateCommitteeonFinancefortheappropriationofP11.3
BillionfortheMay10,2010AES,viz.:
MR. ROXASCHUA. Your Honor, Your Honor, the basis for this is really the ARMM election because we used
similarstructure.Itwasalsoaleasewithanoptiontopurchaseandthisiswherewecameupwiththe70percent
pricefortheleasewiththeoptiontopurchase.Thatisthestructurethatweusedandtherewassuccessfulbidder
soweusedthatasabasis,asthecoststructureforthisnextelection.
THE CHAIRMAN.33 Hindi. Siyempre doon sa ARMM, kinocompartmentalized (compartmentalize) ninyo per
province.O,Maguindanao,youwilluseDRE.TherestwewilluseCOS.Oo.So,localized.Itonationwideito.34
The CommentinIntervention of the Senate of the Philippines also affirmed the congressional intention to
implementafullnationwideautomationoftheelectionsthisMay10,2010.Itcategoricallystatedthattheapproval
ofthesupplementalbudgetofP11.3 billion for the upcoming May 10, 2010 elections was not merely for a pilot
test,butforafullnationwideimplementationoftheAES.
Inthecaseatbartherefore,thereisunmistakableevidenceofthelegislativeintenttoimplementafullnationwide
automation of the May 2010 elections. It is impossible to give effect to this intent and at the same time comply
withtheconditionprecedentofconductingpilotexercisesinselectedareas.TheirreconcilabilitybetweenSection
5ofRA8436,asamended,andSection2ofRA9525isapparentforCongresscouldnothavemaintainedthe
requirement of a pilot exercise as a condition precedent to full automation when it had made it absolutely clear
thatitwantedtopushthroughwithafullnationwideAESthisMay2010.
LawsofCongresshaveequalintrinsicdignityandeffectandtheimpliedrepealofapriorbyasubsequentlawof
thatbodymustdependuponitsintentionandpurposeinenactingthesubsequentlaw.35Whatisnecessaryisa
manifestindicationofalegislativepurposetorepeal.Repealbyimplicationproceedsfromthepremisethatwhere
a statute of a later date clearly reveals an intention on the part of the legislature to abrogate a prior act on the
subject,thatintentionmustbegiveneffect.

c.3COMELECsAwardoftheAutomationContracttotheSmartmaticTIMConsortiumNotAttendedbyGrave
AbuseofDiscretion
ThepetitionersattributegraveabuseofdiscretionamountingtolackorexcessofjurisdictiontotheCOMELECfor
awardingthe2010ElectionsAutomationProjecttoSmartmaticTIMCorporation,onfourgrounds,viz.:
1. Private Respondents Smartmatic and TIM allegedly did not execute and submit a valid joint venture
agreement evidencing the existence, composition and scope of their joint venture, in violation of the
COMELECsownbiddingrequirementsandthisCourtsrulinginInformationTechnologyofthePhilippines,
etal.v.COMELEC,etal.36
2.Evengrantingthatsuchanagreementwassubmitted,thejointventureisneverthelessillegalforhaving
beenconstitutedinviolationofthenationalityrequirement,i.e.,60%40%Filipinoforeignequityceiling
3.TheAESchosenbytheCOMELECdoesnotcomplywiththe"priorsuccessfuluse"qualificationsetforth
inSection12ofRA8436,asamendedand
4. The PCOS machines offered by the SmartmaticTIM Consortium do not satisfy the minimum system
capabilitiesmandatedbySection7ofRA8436,asamended.
Preliminarily,itshouldbeunderscoredthatRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369,doesnotmandatetheuseofany
specificvotingequipment.Instead,thelawgaveCOMELECthesolepowertoprescribetheadoptionofthemost
suitabletechnologyofdemonstratedcapability37asitmaydeemappropriateandpractical,38takingintoaccount
thesituationprevailingintheareaandthefundsavailableforthepurpose.39Absentanycapriciousandwhimsical
exercise of judgment on the part of the COMELEC, its determination of the appropriate election technology, as
wellastheprocedureforitsprocurement,shouldberespected.Ourjudicialfunctionismerelytocheckandnotto
supplantthejudgmentoftheCOMELECtoascertainmerelywhetherithasgonebeyondthelimitsprescribedby
law,andnottoexercisethepowervestedinitortodeterminethewisdomofitsact.40
c.4ValidJVAwasdulysubmitted
ThepetitionersclaimthatprivaterespondentsSmartmaticandTIMsubmitteda"sham"jointventureagreement
duringthebiddingprocess.Theclaimispremisedonthefollowingallegations:(i)thatalthoughSmartmaticand
TIMwereawardedtheAutomationContractbytheCOMELEConJune9,2009,itwasonlyonJuly6,2009(or
twentysevendayslater)thattheywereableto"threshouttheirseriousdifferences,"signandthereaftersubmit
theirincorporationpaperstotheSecuritiesandExchangeCommissionand(ii)thattheprovisionsoftheJVAdo
notsufficientlyestablishthedueexistence,compositionandscopeoftheSmartmaticTIMjointventure.
As to the first allegation, it should be noted that the TOR/RFP made by the COMELEC does not require that a
jointventurebidderbeincorporateduponthesubmissionofitsbid.Section2.2.4ofPartIX(B)oftheTOR/RFP
declares"[m]anufacturers,suppliersand/ordistributorsformingthemselvesintoajointventure[...]"aseligibleto
participateinthebiddingforthe2010AutomationProject,withoutanyincorporatedvs.unincorporateddichotomy.
That the TOR/RFP does not specifically call for incorporation at the time of the bidding is significant, because
Philippinelawadmitsofadistinctionbetweensimplejointventuresandordinarycorporations.41InAurbach,etal.
v.SanitaryWaresManufacturingCorporation,etal.,42ajointventurewaslikenedbythisCourttoapartnership,
thus:
The legal concept of a joint venture is of common law origin. It has no precise legal definition, but it has been
generally understood to mean an organization formed for some temporary purpose. It is hardly distinguishable
fromthepartnership,sincetheirelementsaresimilarcommunityofinterestinthebusiness,sharingofprofits
andlosses,andamutualrightofcontrol.Themaindistinctioncitedbymostopinionsincommonlawjurisdictionis
that the partnership contemplates a general business with some degree of continuity, while the joint venture is
formedfortheexecutionofasingletransaction,andisthusofatemporarynature.Thisobservationisnotentirely
accurate in this jurisdiction, since under the Civil Code, a partnership may be particular or universal, and a
particularpartnershipmayhaveforitsobjectaspecificundertaking.ItwouldseemthereforethatunderPhilippine
law, a joint venture is a form of partnership and should thus be governed by the law of partnerships. The
Supreme Court has however recognized a distinction between these two business forms, and has held that
although a corporation cannot enter into a partnership contract, it may however engage in a joint venture with
others.(Citationsomitted.)
ButanyremainingdoubtastotheneedforincorporationisdispelledbyBidBulletinNo.1943andBidBulletinNo.
22,44 issued by the COMELECSBAC to provide clarifications to prospective bidders. Both documents
acknowledge that a bid by a joint venture may be made either through a joint venture corporation (JVC) or an
unincorporatedjointventure(UJV).BidBulletinNo.19provides,inrelevantpart:
[Question/Issue:]Ifthebiddingwillbemadethroughanunincorporatedjointventure(UJV),andtheUJVwinsthe

bid, can the UJV partners subsequently assign the contract, after its award, to a newlyformed joint venture
corporation(JVC)registeredwiththeSecuritiesandExchangeCommission?TheregisteredJVCwillassumeall
rightsandobligationsoftheUJV.DoesComelechaveanyrequirementsforallowingsuchassignmenttotheJVC?
[Answer/Clarification:] Under the General Conditions of Contract, Sec. 26.1, "The supplier shall not assign his
rightsorobligationsunderthiscontractinwholeorinpartexceptwiththeProcuringentityspriorwrittenconsent."
xxx
xxxx
[Question/Issue:]Ifthebidwillbemadethroughajointventure(JV)(eitheraUJVoraJVC),istheJVrequired
alsotosubmitaTaxIdentificationNo.andValueAddedTax(VAT)registration?
[Answer/Clarification:]PleaseseeBidBulletinNo.13.(Emphasissupplied.)
Likewise,BidBulletinNo.22statesasfollows:
[Question/Issue:] How does Joint Venture apply to our group in order to follow the requirement that Filipino
ownershipthereofshallbeatleastsixtypercent(60%)?
[Answer/Clarification:]The60%FilipinoparticipationreferstocapitalownershiportheFilipinocontributioninthe
pool of financial resources required to undertake a government project. In an unincorporated joint venture,
determination of the required Filipino participation may be made by examining the terms and conditions of the
joint venture agreement and other supporting financial documents submitted by the joint venture. (Emphasis
supplied.)
The only restriction imposed on a UJV bidder (visvis a JVC bidder) by the TOR/RFP and the Bid Bulletins is
thattheCOMELECshouldconsentbeforetheUJVcouldassignitsrightstotheAutomationContracttothenewly
formedJVC.TherecordsshowthatSmartmaticandTIMcompliedwiththeconsentrequirement.Afteremerging
asthewinningbidder,theyincorporatedtheSmartmaticTIMCorporation,thecorporatevehiclethroughwhichthe
jointventureistobecarriedout.45COMELECacquiescedtothisarrangement,foritsubsequentlyenteredintoa
contractwiththisJVCfortheAutomationProject.
ThepetitionersnextassertthattheJVAdoesnotsufficientlyestablishthedueexistence,compositionandscope
oftheSmartmaticTIMjointventure,inviolationofourrulinginInformationTechnologyofthePhilippines,etal.v.
COMELEC,etal.:46that"intheabsenceofdefiniteindicatorsastotheamountofinvestmentstobecontributed
byeachparty,disbursementsforexpenses,thepartiesrespectivesharesintheprofitsandthelike,itseemsto
the Court that this situation could readily give rise to all kinds of misunderstandings and disagreements over
money matters" and that "[u]nder such a scenario, it will be extremely difficult for Comelec to enforce the
supposedjointandseveralliabilitiesofthemembersoftheconsortium."Accordingtothepetitioners,Smartmatic
andTIMdidnotsubmitdocumentstoshow"thefullidentityoftheentityitisdealingwith,"and"whocontrolsthe
money,howmuchdideachoftheseentitiesinvestto(sic)theallegedjointventure,andwhohascontroloverthe
decision[]makingprocessoftheallegedjointventure."
A cursory glance at the JVA belies the petitioners posture. The agreement indicates in a thorough and
comprehensive manner the identity, rights, duties, commitments and covenants of the parties, as well as the
purpose,capitalization,andotherpertinentdetailsinrespectofthejointventure,thus:
1.SmartmaticandTIMarethemembersofthejointventure.47
2.ThepurposeoftheJVCistocarryoutandperformjointly,severallyandsolidarilytheobligationsofTIM
and Smartmatic arising from being declared the winning bidder in the public bidding for the Automation
Project,whichobligationsarespelledoutinthe[TOR/RFP]releasedbytheCOMELEC.48
3. The authorized capital stock of the JVC is one billion, three hundred million Philippine pesos
(P1,300,000,000.00), divided into one billion, three hundred million common shares at one peso (P1.00)
parvalue.49ThecapitalcontributionofTIMisequivalenttosixtypercent(60%)ofthesharestobeissued
bytheJVC,withSmartmaticcontributingtheresidualfortypercent(40%).50
4.Thecontributions51ofthepartiesareasfollows:
a.TIM(i)thevalueaddedservicespertainingorrelatedtocanvassingunits,systemsintegration,
transmissionandsuchotherservicesasrequiredbytheAutomationProjectandasindicatedinthe
[TOR/RFP](ii)servicespertainingorrelatedtologistics,deployment,andmanpower(iii)hardware,
software, ballot paper, consumables and such other services as may be requested by Smartmatic
and(iv)localsupportstaffasmayberequiredunderthecircumstances.

b. Smartmatic (i) the development, manufacture and/or supply of [electronic voting machines],
other machines and equipment, software, technology and systems (ii) overall project management
asrequiredbytheAutomationProjectandasindicatedinthe[TOR/RFP]52and(iii)anyotheractivity
notexpresslywrittenintheJVAorassignedtoTIM.
c. Both parties (i) technical services and/or assistance to carry out the purpose of the JVC (ii)
financialassistancetotheJVCand(iii)additionalcapitalcontributions,asmayberequestedbythe
BoardofDirectors.
5.TIMshallbeentitledtonominateandelect60%,andSmartmaticshallbeentitledtonominateandelect
40%,oftheBoardofDirectorsoftheJVC.53
6.TheEXCOMshallconsistofatleastthree(3)Directors,twoofwhommustbeDirectorsnominatedby
TIM,withtheothernominatedbySmartmatic.54
7. Profits are to be distributed to TIM and Smartmatic as may be determined by the Board of Directors
under Article 4.5 or by the Shareholders under Article 5.3 of the JVA, taking into account the financial
requirementsoftheJVCwithrespecttoworkingcapital.55
8.AnydisputeordisagreementthatmayarisebetweenthepartiesinconnectionwiththeJVAshallfirstbe
settledthroughmutualcooperationandconsultationingoodfaith.Anydisputeordisagreementthatcannot
beamicablysettledbetweenthepartiesshallbesubmittedtoarbitrationinSingapore,inaccordancewith
thecommercialarbitrationrulesoftheSingaporeChamberofCommerce,theaccompanyingexpensesin
eithercasetobeequallysharedbybothparties.56
9.TIMandSmartmaticarejointlyandseverallyliabletotheCOMELECfortheobligationsofeachofTIM
andSmartmaticundertheTOR/RFP,shouldtheybeawardedthecontractfortheAutomationProject.57
Trappedintheirown"Catch22,"petitionersinvocationofInformationTechnologyismisplaced.Thefactsofthat
case are entirely different. In the main, no JVA or document of similar import was submitted during the bidding
processtotheCOMELECinInformationTechnology.Theonly"evidence"astotheexistenceoftheallegedjoint
venturewasaselfservingletterexpressingthatMegaPacificeSolutions,Inc.,Election.com,Ltd.,WeSolvOpen
Computing,Inc.,SKC&C,andePLDTandOracleSystem(Philippines),Inc.hadagreedtoformaconsortiumto
bid for the Automation Project. This notwithstanding, the COMELEC awarded the contract to the "consortium."
AndtheCourtpointedlyruled:
The March 7, 2003 letter, signed by only one signatory "Willy U. Yu, President, Mega Pacific eSolutions, Inc.,
(Lead Company/Proponent) For: Mega Pacific Consortium" and without any further proof, does not by itself
provetheexistenceoftheconsortium.ItdoesnotshowthatMPEIoritspresidenthavebeendulypreauthorized
by the other members of the putative consortium to represent them, to bid on their collective behalf and, more
important, to commit them jointly and severally to the bid undertakings. The letter is purely selfserving and
uncorroborated.
To assure itself properly of the due existence (as well as eligibility and qualification) of the putative consortium,
Comelec's BAC should have examined the bidding documents submitted on behalf of MPC. They would have
easilydiscoveredthefollowingfatalflaws.
xxxx
Inthecaseofaconsortiumorjointventuredesirousofparticipatinginthebidding,itgoeswithoutsayingthatthe
Eligibility Envelope would necessarily have to include a copy of the joint venture agreement, the consortium
agreement or memorandum of agreement or a business plan or some other instrument of similar import
establishingthedueexistence,compositionandscopeofsuchaggrupation.Otherwise,howwouldComelecknow
who it was dealing with, and whether these parties are qualified and capable of delivering the products and
servicesbeingofferedforbidding?
Intheinstantcase,nosuchinstrumentwassubmittedtoComelecduringthebiddingprocess.Thisfactcanbe
conclusivelyascertainedbyscrutinizingthetwoinchthick"EligibilityRequirements"filesubmittedbyComeleclast
October 9, 2003, in partial compliance with this Court's instructions given during the Oral Argument. This file
purportstoreplicatetheeligibilitydocumentsoriginallysubmittedtoComelecbyMPEIallegedlyonbehalfofMPC,
in connection with the bidding conducted in March 2003. Included in the file are the incorporation papers and
financial statements of the members of the supposed consortium and certain certificates, licenses and permits
issuedtothem.
However, there is no sign whatsoever of any joint venture agreement, consortium agreement, memorandum of
agreement,orbusinessplanexecutedamongthemembersofthepurportedconsortium.

TheonlylogicalconclusionisthatnosuchagreementwaseversubmittedtotheComelecforitsconsideration,as
partofthebiddingprocess.
It thus follows that, prior the award of the Contract, there was no documentary or other basis for Comelec to
conclude that a consortium had actually been formed amongst MPEI, SK C&C and WeSolv, along with
Election.com and ePLDT. Neither was there anything to indicate the exact relationships between and among
thesefirmstheirdiverseroles,undertakingsandprestations,ifany,relativetotheprosecutionoftheproject,the
extentoftheirrespectiveinvestments(ifany)inthesupposedconsortiumorintheprojectandtheprecisenature
andextentoftheirrespectiveliabilitieswithrespecttothecontractbeingofferedforbidding.Andapartfromthe
selfserving letter of March 7, 2003, there was not even any indication that MPEI was the lead company duly
authorizedtoactonbehalfoftheothers.
So, it necessarily follows that, during the bidding process, Comelec had no basis at all for determining that the
allegedconsortiumreallyexistedandwaseligibleandqualifiedandthatthearrangementsamongthemembers
weresatisfactoryandsufficienttoensuredeliveryontheContractandtoprotectthegovernment'sinterest.
xxxx
Atthisjuncture,onemightask:What,then,iftherearefourMOAsinsteadofoneornoneatall?Isn'titenough
thattherearethesecorporationscomingtogethertocarryouttheautomationproject?Isn'tittrue,asrespondent
aver,thatnowhereintheRFPissuedbyComelecisitrequiredthatthemembersofthejointventureexecutea
singlewrittenagreementtoprovetheexistenceofajointventure.Indeed,theintentiontobejointlyandseverally
liable may be evidenced not only by a single joint venture agreement, but also by supplementary documents
executedbythepartiessignifyingsuchintention.Whatthenisthebigdeal?
The problem is not that there are four agreements instead of only one. The problem is that Comelec never
bothered to check. It never based its decision on documents or other proof that would concretely establish the
existence of the claimed consortium or joint venture or agglomeration. It relied merely on the selfserving
representationinanuncorroboratedlettersignedbyonlyoneindividual,claimingthathiscompanyrepresenteda
"consortium"ofseveraldifferentcorporations.Itconcludedforthwiththataconsortiumindeedexisted,composed
ofsuchandsuchmembers,andthereafterdeclaredthattheentitywaseligibletobid.
xxxx
In brief, despite the absence of competent proof as to the existence and eligibility of the alleged consortium
(MPC), its capacity to deliver on the Contract, and the members' joint and several liability therefor, Comelec
neverthelessassumedthatsuchconsortiumexistedandwaseligible.Itthenwentaheadandconsideredthebid
ofMPC,towhichtheContractwaseventuallyawarded,ingrossviolationoftheformer'sownbiddingrulesand
procedurescontainedinitsRFP.ThereinliesComelec'sgraveabuseofdiscretion.(Emphasisandunderscoring
supplied.)58
To make matters worse, the COMELEC in Information Technology awarded the bid to the "consortium" despite
somefailedmarksduringthetechnicalevaluation.59Inthecaseatbar,theSmartmaticTIMConsortiumpassed
thetechnicalevaluation.
ItisthusreadilyapparentthatthejointventureofSmartmaticandTIMisnotattendedbyanyofthedeficiencies
oftheMP"consortium,"astheagreementintheinstantcasestateswithprecisionthe"exactnatureandscopeof
the parties respective undertakings, commitments, deliverables and covenants."60 The petitioners repeated
recoursetoInformationTechnologybetraysahighlymyopicandconstrictedview.
c.5Nonationalityrequirementisviolated
Petitioners also contend that the joint venture agreement of TIM and Smartmatic violates the Filipinoforeign
equityceiling,theAntiDummyLawandCOMELECsownbiddingrequirements.
I concur fully with the ponencia of Mr. Justice Velasco on this point. There is no constitutional or statutory
provisionclassifyingtheleaseorprovisionofgoodsandtechnicalservicesfortheautomationofanelectionasa
nationalized activity. To be sure, Section 12 of RA 8436, as amended by RA 9369, explicitly authorizes the
COMELECtoprocuresupplies,equipment,materials,software,facilities,andotherservicesfromforeignsources,
asfollows:
SEC. 12. Procurement of Equipment and Materials. To achieve the purpose of this Act, the Commission is
authorized to procure, in accordance with existing laws, by purchase, lease, rent or other forms of acquisition,
supplies, equipment, materials, software, facilities and other services, from local or foreign sources free from
taxes and import duties, subject to accounting and auditing rules and regulations. With respect to the May 10,
2010electionsandsucceedingelectoralexercises,thesystemprocuredmusthavedemonstratedcapabilityand
beensuccessfullyusedinapriorelectoralexercisehereorabroad.Participationinthe2007pilotexerciseshall

notbeconclusiveofthesystem'sfitness.(Emphasissupplied.)
PetitionerscannotrelyonExecutiveOrderNo.584(EO584),containingtheSeventhRegularForeignInvestment
NegativeList,whichcites"contractsforthesupplyofmaterials,goodsandcommoditiesto[a]governmentowned
or controlled corporation, company, agency or municipal corporation" as limited to forty percent (40%) foreign
equity.Thereliancecannotbecountenancedinlightoftwobasicprinciplesofstatutoryconstruction.
First, leges posteriores priores contrarias abrogant. In case of an irreconcilable conflict between two laws of
different vintages, the later enactment prevails.61 The rationale is simple: a later law repeals an earlier one
because it is the later legislative will.62 RA 9369, which allows the COMELEC to procure AES supplies and
equipmentfromforeignsources,becamelawin2007,whereasEO584isanexecutiveissuancein2006.
Second, lex specialis derogat generali. General legislation must give way to special legislation on the same
subject, and generally is so interpreted as to embrace only cases in which the special provisions are not
applicable.63Inotherwords,wheretwostatutesareofequaltheoreticalapplicationtoaparticularcase,theone
speciallydesignedthereforshouldprevail.64RA9369specificallycoversawelldefinedsubject(i.e.,procurement
forelectionautomation),whereasEO584hasamoreuniversalscope.
Insum,thereisnoconstitutionalorstatutoryFilipinoforeignequityceilingtospeakof,andtheAntiDummyLaw
doesnotfindapplicationtothecaseatbar.
Nonetheless,Iwishtoclarifycertainmatters.
Itappearsthatinpreparingthebiddereligibilityrequirements,theCOMELEC,exercisingthediscretiongrantedby
Section12ofRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369,adoptedtheguidelinesthatweresetforthintheImplementing
RulesandRegulationsofRA9184(TheGovernmentProcurementReformAct).Thus,inSections2.2.1to2.2.4
ofPartIX(B)oftheTOR/RFP,theCOMELECinvitedthefollowingtobidfortheAutomationProject:
(1)DulylicensedFilipinocitizens/proprietorships
(2)PartnershipsdulyorganizedunderthelawsofthePhilippinesandofwhichatleastsixtypercent(60%)
oftheinterestbelongstocitizensofthePhilippines
(3)CorporationsdulyorganizedunderthelawsofthePhilippines,andofwhichatleastsixtypercent(60%)
oftheoutstandingcapitalstockbelongstocitizensofthePhilippines
(4)Manufacturers,suppliersand/ordistributorsformingthemselvesintoajointventure,i.e.,agroupoftwo
(2)ormoremanufacturers,suppliersand/ordistributors,thatintendtobejointlyandseverallyresponsible
or liable for a particular contract, provided that Filipino ownership thereof shall be at least sixty percent
(60%)and
(5)CooperativesdulyregisteredwiththeCooperativesDevelopmentAuthority.
Butforafewinnocuousstylisticchanges,thisenumerationisanexactreproductionofSection23.11.165 of the
ImplementingRulesandRegulationsofRA9184.
Per Smartmatic TIM Corporations Articles of Incorporation, there is no question that the JVC complied with the
6040 equity ceiling provided under the TOR/RFP. Out of a total paidup capital of P1,130,000,000.00, TIM
contributed sixty percent (60%) thereof (equivalent to P678,000,000.00), while Smartmatic paid the remaining
fortypercent(40%)(equivalenttoP452,000,000.00).
The petitioners, however, allege that the sixty percent (60%) interest of TIM in the JVC was merely simulated.
TheypointtocertainprovisionsintheJVAasdenotingthateffectivecontroloverSmartmaticTIMCorporationwas
giventoSmartmatic.Specifically,petitionersassailthefollowing:
(1) The mandatory presence of at least one of the nominated Directors of Smartmatic to establish a
quorumoftheBoardofDirectors,pursuanttoArticle4.366oftheJVA
(2)ThevetopowerintheBoardofDirectorsgrantedbyTIMtoSmartmatictoauthorizecertainimportant
financialandtechnicalactions,pursuanttoArticle4.567oftheJVA
(3) The mandatory presence of the Director representing Smartmatic to establish a quorum of the
ExecutiveCommittee(EXECOM),pursuanttoArticle4.768oftheJVAand
(4)ThesolerightofSmartmatictonominatethe(a)ChairmanoftheBoard,(b)theTreasurer,and(c)the
CorporateSecretary,andTIMscorrespondingdutytoelectsaidnominees,pursuanttoArticles4.1069and

4.1170oftheJVA.
But far from establishing the tyranny of the minority, these provisions may be viewed as legitimate minority
protection devices. Through them, Smartmatic sought to protect its huge investment in the Automation Project.
Without these protective provisions, Smartmatic would be helplessly exposed to the risk of being outvoted on
significant corporate activities and decisions including decisions on technical matters falling within its field of
expertise, for which it is primarily responsible (as against TIM) under the express terms of the COMELECs
biddingrules71andtheAutomationContract72itself.Ifthatwouldcometopass,Smartmaticcouldnotperformits
partoftheContractandtheendresultwouldbetheruinofitsinvestment.
To be sure, our lawmakers wanted the foreign joint venture to be autonomous in carrying out its technical
functions,andintendedtoprotectitfromthewhimsandcapricesofthenonexpertmajority.Thiscanbegleaned
fromtheApril20,2009hearingoftheJointCommitteeonAES,duringwhichthefollowingexchangesweremade:
MR. MELO. Here is a scenario, Your Honor. Scantron, for instance and a Philippine Company, they have an
agreement,anagreement,jointventureagreement.
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).Andtheonewhocarriesitoutwill[be]Scantronevenifits40percent?
MR.MELO.Scantron,letussay,wins.Aftertheywin,afterScantronwins,now,thetwo,theyformacompany.
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).Yes.Butdoyouwillyoucheckthattheoneswhowillcarryouttheprojectwill
be,inthecaseofSmartmatic,theguyswhoactuallyconductelectionsinVenezuelaandnotsomelocalboyswho
arejust,youknow,dreamingthattheycandoit?
MR.MELO.Butthecontractwillnowbeawardedinfavorofthenewcompany?
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).Yes.Butwhowillimplementit?
MR.MELO.Yes,wewillmakethemjointlyandseverallyliable.
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).Imnotreallyworriednordo(sic)amIconcernedaboutpunishingthemupafter
thefailureofelections.Iwouldjustreallywanttomakesurethattheguyswhowillrunthiswillnotbethelocal
boysbuttheforeignboyswhohaveactuallydoneitabroad.Idontwantamateurs,youknow,tryingtoproveyes,
theFilipinocan.
MR. MELO. Yes, Your Honor, precisely. This is speaking my mind alound (sic). Let us say, a foreign company
goes into a partnership who (sic) are coventure (sic) in system with a Philippine company. The Philippine
companyisusuallytakenforitsexpertiseinthedispersalofthemachinesbecause[theforeigncompany]does
notneedanothertechnicalcompanyexpertincomputers.
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).Itsthedeploymentofthemachines.
MR.MELO.Deployment.xxx(Emphasissupplied)73
***
THE CHAIRMAN (SEN. ESCUDERO). x x x What legal methodology, memorandum or agreement will you be
requiringtomakesurethatitstheforeignerwhoknowshowtorunit,whowillactuallyrunthe[show]andnotbe
outvoted each time within the company, 6040? I mean [the Filipino company] can promise that, "Hindi ho, sila
angnakakaintindi,silabahala,kamirolloutlang."Butwhatassurancedowehaveandwhatlegaldocumentdo
youintendtorequireinsofarasthisisconcerned?(Emphasissupplied)74
***
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).xxxAsIsaid,oneofthemostcompellingargumentsforthebigguystowin,
theforeigners,isthattheyhaveareputationtodefend.NoFilipinohasareputationtodefendinIT.InIT,theres
none. The problem here is, as Senator Escudero said, a 60 percent joint venture partner. Are there any
provisions you have made that would prevent them from interfering in the technical aspects of the electronic
elections?Whatifyouhavethemajoritypartnersdictatinghowitwillbedone?
xxxx
THE CHAIRMAN (REP. LOCSIN). You will have to put really strict sanctions on any interference by the majority
partnerinthejudgmentoftheminoritypartnerinimplementingthemajorityproject.Idontknowhowthatsdone
though.(Emphasissupplied)75

***
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).ThequestionwewereaskingOurapprehensionhere,SenatorEscuderoand
myself, is that, will the 60 percent which has no track record and is Filipino and may have political affiliations,
wouldtheybeinapositiontoinfluencethe40percentminoritythatistheexpertinelectronicelections?Would
the60percentbeabletocompromisetheintegrityofthe40percent?
MR.RAFANAN.76Doyousay,sir,bidderwithpoliticalconnections?
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).Thatsjustanexample.Whatweresayingisthata40percenttrackrecord
thetrackrecordofthe40percentpartner,say,Sequoiaorwhatever.Imean,noquestion.Theyrequalifiedbut
theyre always in a minority position in the joint venture company. What if the majority Filipino tells them to
compromisetheintegrity?Whatmeasuresdoyoutake?(Emphasissupplied)77
***
THECHAIRMAN(SEN.ESCUDERO).xxxSo,angtanongko[,]youreawarding[thecontractto]acompanywith
a track record although may minority, minority lang siya. How sure are you na hindi siya didiktahan nung 60
percentnawalangtrackrecord,walangexperience,souselessyungrequirementnatinnamaytrackrecordka
hindinamansiyaangmasusunod,angmasusunodyungmayaring60percentnaFilipinonawalangtrackrecord
atwalangkaalamalampresumably.
xxxx
THE CHAIRMAN (REP. LOCSIN). Senator Enrile, our worry is that the 60 percent may dictate on the expert 40
percent.Wouldajointventurecontractbeabletoprovidesomeautonomytothe40percentexpertsothatthey
cannotbeinterferedwith?
THE SENATE PRESIDENT. x x x [A] joint venture is a matter of contract. You have to apart from the legal
requirement,youhavetoembedintothejointventurecontracttheobligationofeachofthejointventurer.
THECHAIRMAN(SEN.ESCUDERO).So,essentially...
THESENATEPRESIDENT.Includingtheirvoiceinthejointventure.
THECHAIRMAN(SEN.ESCUDERO).So,essentiallyngaho[,]weareboundanddoomedtoawardthiscontract
toacompanymajorityofwhichwillbeownedbyindividualsoranothercompanythathasnotrackrecordtospeak
of?Kasiyungobligasyonnanatingiawardiyang60/40saFilipinocompany,weareobligatedbylaw,thatswhat
youresaying,toawardittoacompanymajorityofwhichwillbeownedbyacompanyorindividualswithoutany
trackrecordwhatsoever?
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).ButSenatorEnrile,cantheComelecrequireaparticularjointventurecontract
that would specify the particular obligations of the parties and in some cases that obligation would be would
protecttheminoritysintegrityinconductingtheelection?
xxxx
THECHAIRMAN(SEN.ESCUDERO).xxx[F]oryoutorequireorimposearequirementsayingthatthe40will
controlthe60isacircumvention,ifatall,ofthe60/40ruleaswell.
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).Butwoulditnotbeacircumvention,say,forvotingpurposesforcontrolofthe
corporationbutnotforthepurelytechnicalaspectofconductinganelectronicelectiontoprotecttheintegrityof
thatundertaking?
THECHAIRMAN(SEN.ESCUDERO).Withoutarguingthatpoint,Imaytendtoagreewiththatpointbutthefact
is,legallythequestionishowwillyoubeabletoovercomeit?
THECHAIRMAN(REP.LOCSIN).Canyourequirethatinyourtermsofreference?
MR.MELO.Isuppose,YourHonor.Youretheexperthere,ManongJohnny.Butinthejointventure,canitnotbe
providedthattheforeigncompanyshallhaveexclusivesayonthetechnicalaspect?
THESENATEPRESIDENT.Puwedeiyon.
MR.MELO.Iyon.
THESENATEPRESIDENT.Youcaninsist[on]that.

MR.MELO.Yes.
THESENATEPRESIDENT.TheComeleccanimposethat.
MR.MELO.Yes,insofarasthetechnicalaspectisconcerned,itsonlyitstheforeigncompany,thesupplierof
the computers, of the machines which will have exclusive say. And so the dispersal or the deployment of the
machineswillbeanothermatter.(Emphasissupplied.)78
ThepetitionersfindparticularlyrepugnantSmartmaticsvetopowerintheBoardofDirectorsinrespectofcertain
keyfinancialandtechnicalactions.Inmyview,however,thisisbutafairandreasonablecheckagainstpossible
abuses by the majority stockholder. As Smartmatic is the joint venture partner having the greater experience in
automated elections, it deemed it necessary to reserve to itself the veto power on these important financial
matters so as not to compromise the technical aspects of the Automation Project. As far as matters other than
those provided in Article 4.5 are concerned, Smartmatic does not have any veto right. This is clear from Article
4.4,whichprovidesasfollows:
4.4 Resolution on matters other than those set forth in Article 4.5 below shall be adopted by the vote of the
majorityoftheDirectorspresentandconstitutingaquorum,exceptasotherwiseprovidedbylaw.
The same conclusion may be obtained from the deliberations of the Senate Committee on Constitutional
Amendments, Revision of Codes and Laws. The following exchanges from their June 23, 2009 hearing79 are
illuminatingonthispoint:
THECHAIRMAN.IwentthroughyourJVAandIfoundsomeprovisionspeculiarandinteresting.InyourJVA[,it]
statesthatnoboardresolutionshallbepassedinthefirstplace,threemembersoftheboardwillbelongtoTIM,
local,twomembersoftheboardwillbelongtoSmartmatic,foreign,so6040namantalagaiyon.Myquestionis,
underyourJVA[,]itsaysnoresolutionshallbepassedunlessTIMwiththreevotes,presumablymajorityalready,
can secure the vote of Smartmatic, vice versa. But vice versa is expected because you only have two votes. If
TIMneedstosecureonemorevotefromyoubeforetheycandoanything,numberone,thereisapotentialfora
deadlock.Numbertwo,isthatnoteffectivecontrolorvetopoweroverthecompanythatessentiallyoverridesor
circumventsthe6040requirement?
MR. FLORES. No, sir. Thats a standard practice to protect minority investors and it only relates to certain key
decisionsnottothewholedevelopmentoftheproject.
THECHAIRMAN.Majordecisions?
MR.FLORES.Yes,sir.
THECHAIRMAN.Wediscussedthisbefore[,]ChairmanMelo,remember?
MR. MELO. Yes, Your Honor. Precisely at that time it was the suggestion of the committee, the Oversight
Committeethatmajordecisionsordecisionsconcerningtechnicalmatters,concerningthemachineswillhaveto
bemadebySmartmatic.Theycannotbecontrolledbythelocalpartnerbecause,otherwise,bakahohindinaman
expertyunglocalpartnersaanosowefollowthat.
xxxx
THECHAIRMAN.Butmyquestionis,stillthereisa6040requirement.WhatifayawpumayagngSmartmatic?So
doesthelocalcompanyhaveeffectivecontroloverthejointventurecompany?xxx
MR.RAFANAN.80Sir,concerningdecisionsthatwillpertaintotechnicalproblemsortroubleshootingproblemsin
theelection,weareprovidinginthecontractthatthesematterswillbeentrustedtotheforeigncorporationwhich
isSmartmaticInternational.
THE SENATE PRESIDENT. I assume that this provision in their agreement, between the joint venturers[,] is a
functionoftrustbetweenthem.Isupposetheyhavejustmetinthisparticularventureandsotheydonotknow
eachotherverywell,sotheforeigncompanywillnaturallyprotectwanttoprotectitselfthatitwillnotbeousted
fromtheventureincaseofYouknow,youaredealingherewithacertainmagnitudeoffinancialbenefits.SoI
supposethatisintendedtoprotectthemselves.
xxxx
THECHAIRMAN.Sir,Illgiveyouanexample.
THESENATEPRESIDENT.Ascollectivityha.
THE CHAIRMAN. This is what they will on requiring [Smartmatics] one vote even if TIM, the local company,

alreadyhasthreevotes.Approvalofoperatingcapitalexpendituresandbudgetsfortheyearapprovaloffinancial
statementselectionorremovalofcorporateofficers[Weare]nottalkingtechnicalhereyet.xxxApprovalof
financial plans borrowing, etcetera. Entering into or terminating an agreement involving technology transfer
delegationofpowerstodirectors,officersanddelegationofpowerstocommittees.xxx
xxxx
THECHAIRMAN.Financial,appointingofofficials.
THESENATEPRESIDENT.Yes,iftheycanberemoved,iftheydonothavethatvetopower,the60percentcan
kickthemoutaftertheygetthecontract.
xxxx
THECHAIRMAN.Butwhereveritiscomingfrom...
THESENATEPRESIDENT.Asalawyer,frommyexperience,wehavedonethatbeforeinmanycasesinorderto
protect, to be fair, to be equitable to the people who are coming here for the first time or who are dealing with
peoplethattheydonotknowverywell.81(Emphasissupplied.)
PetitionersalsofindobjectionableSmartmaticssolerighttonominatetheTreasurer,CorporateSecretaryandthe
Chairman of the Board, and TIMs corresponding duty to elect said nominees. However, the objection
convenientlydisregardsthefactthat,tomaintainthebalanceofpower,TIMinturnhasthesolerighttonominate
the President and Chief Executive Officer and the Assistant Corporate Secretary of the joint venture
corporation.82PursuanttoArticle4.11oftheJVA,SmartmaticisinfactobligedtocauseitsDirectorstovotefor
theofficerschosenbyTIM.Moreover,asanaddedmeanstoprotecttheirrespectiveinterestsinthejointventure,
SmartmaticandTIMfurtheragreedthatforthevalidityoftheresolutionscontainedtherein,allcertificationstobe
issuedmustbearthesignaturesofboththeCorporateSecretaryandtheAssistantCorporateSecretary.83
Infine,theprovisionsassailedbyPetitionersarereasonableunderthecircumstancesandshouldbeupheldas
legitimateminorityprotectiondevices.
c.6"PriorSuccessfulUse"qualificationhasbeencompliedwith
The petitioners postulate that the PCOS machines offered by the Smartmatic TIM Corporation have not been
successfullyusedinanelectoralexerciseinthePhilippinesorabroad,asrequiredbySection12ofRA8436,as
amended.84Aquickoverviewoftheopticalscantechnologyisinorder.
Opticalscanor"Marksense"technologyhasbeenusedfordecadesforstandardizedtestssuchastheScholastic
Aptitude Test (SAT).85 The optical scan ballot is a paperbased technology that relies on computers in the
counting and canvassing process. Voters make their choices by using a pencil or a pen to mark the ballot,
typically by filling in an oval or by drawing a straight line to connect two parts of an arrow.86 The ballots are
countedbyscanners,whichmaybelocatedeitherattheprecinct(in"precinctcount"systems)oratsomecentral
location ("centralcount" systems).87 If ballots are counted at the polling place, voters put the ballots into the
tabulation equipment, which scans and tallies the votes.88 These tallies can be captured in removable storage
media,whicharetransportedtoacentraltallylocationorareelectronicallytransmittedfromthepollingplaceto
the central tally location.89 If ballots are centrally counted, voters drop ballots into sealed boxes and, after the
pollsclose,electionofficialstransferthesealedboxestothecentrallocationwheretheyruntheballotsthrough
thetabulationequipment.90
Thecentralcountsystem(viatheCCOSmachines)wasusedduringthe2008electionsinalltheprovincesofthe
ARMM except in Maguindanao. The COMELEC Advisory Council created by RA 9369 to recommend to the
COMELEC the "appropriate, secure, applicable, and costeffective technology" to be used in the automation of
electionsdeployedvariousmonitorsfromtheDOST,PPCRVandConsortiumonElectoralReformstoobserve
the usability of the technologies used in the ARMM elections as well as to observe the electoral process in
general.91 The CCOS machines were assessed before and during the actual elections, and the COMELEC
Advisory Council eventually determined that these machines sufficiently complied with the minimum systems
configurationspecifiedinSection6ofRA9369.92
Inlightofthisbackground,thequestioniswhetherthecentralcountsystemusedin2008maybeconsideredas
substantial compliance with the "prior successful use" qualification set forth in Section 12 of RA 8436, as
amended.
Withduerespect,Ianswerintheaffirmative.ItisobviousthatthePCOSandCCOSmachinesarebasedonthe
same optical scan technology. The sole difference is that the PCOS machines dispense with the physical

transportation of the ballots to the designated counting centers, since the votes will be counted in the precinct
itself and the results electronically transmitted to the municipal, provincial and national Board of Canvassers.
Tellingly, but for their sweeping and convenient conclusion that "[e]ven if a PCOS [machine] is an OMR [Optical
MarkReader][machine],nevertheless[,]itistotallydifferentfromaCCOS[machine],"thepetitionersweresilent
onthispoint.93
Inanyevent,theAESprocuredbyCOMELECforthe2010electionshasbeensuccessfullyusedinpriorelectoral
exercises in (i) New Brunswick, Canada (ii) Ontario, Canada and (iii) New York the United States of America.
Thepetitionersneverthelessquestionthecertificationssubmittedtothiseffect,arguingthatthesewereissuednot
totheSmartmaticTIMjointventure,buttoathirdpartyDominionVotingSystems.
I find this argument meritless, for it foists unto the law an imaginary requirement. As the COMELEC correctly
observed, what the law requires is that the system must have been successfully utilized in a prior electoral
exercise,notthattheprovider(i.e.,SmartmaticTIMCorporation)shouldhavebeentheonethatpreviouslyused
oremployedthesystem.Consideringthatthesystemsubjectofthecertificationsisthesameoneprocuredbythe
COMELECforthe2010elections,thepriorsuccessfuluserequirementhasbeenadequatelymet.Atanyrate,the
clear terms of the Licensing Agreement between Smartmatic and Dominion Voting Systems indicate that the
formeristheentitylicensedexclusivelybythelattertousethesysteminthePhilippines.
c.7COMELECsdeterminationastominimumsystemscapabilitiesofthePCOSmachinesmustberespected
ThisCourtisneitherconstitutionallypermittednorinstitutionallyoutfittedtoconductacostbenefitanalysisofthe
system or of the nuances of the available technology. It is illequipped to deal with the complex and difficult
problems of election administration. This inordinately difficult undertaking requires expertise, planning, and the
commitment of resources, all of which are peculiarly within the province of the legislative and the executive
branchesofgovernment.
ThepetitionerscontendthatthePCOSmachinesdonotcomplywiththeminimumsystemcapabilities94setforth
bySection6ofRA8436,asamended.Then,inanentirelyspeculativeexercise,theyconjureaperturbingseries
of doomsday scenarios that would allegedly result from using this particular technology: unaddressed logistical
nightmares,failureofelections,andmassivedisenfranchisement.
Let me preface my discussion of this issue by accentuating once more the core of RA 8346, as amended: the
COMELEC, an independent Constitutional Commission armed with specialized knowledge born of years of
experienceintheconductofelections,hasthesoleprerogativetochoosewhichAEStoutilize.95Incarryingout
thismandate,Section6ofthesamelawdirectstheCOMELECtodevelopandadopt,withtheassistanceofthe
COMELECAdvisoryCouncil,anevaluationsystemtoascertainthattheminimumsystemcapabilitiesaremet.
TheCOMELECdidinfactadoptarigidtechnicalevaluationsystemcomposedoftwentysixcriteria,againstwhich
the procured AES was benchmarked by the TWG to determine its viability and concomitant security.96 In this
regard,theTWGascertainedthatthePCOSmachines"PASSEDalltestsasrequiredinthe26itemcriteria,"97as
follows:
ITEM98

REQUIREMENT

REMARK/DESCRIPTION

Does the system allow Yes. The proposed PCOS machine accepted the
manual feeding of a ballot testballotswhichweremanuallyfedoneatatime.
intothePCOSmachine?

Does the system scan a Yes.A30inchballotwasusedinthistest.Scanning

ballot sheet at the speed of the30inchballottook2.7seconds,whichtranslated
at least 2.75 inches per to11.11inchespersecond.
second?

Is the system able to

capture and store in an
encrypted format the digital
images of the ballot for at
least 2,000 ballot sides
(1,000 ballots, with back to
backprinting)?

Yes. The system captured the images of 1,000 test

ballotsinencryptedformat.Eachofthe1,000image
files contained the images of the front and back
sidesoftheballot,totaling2,000ballotsides.
To verify the captured ballot images, decrypted
copies of the encrypted files were also provided.
The same were found to be digitalized
representationsoftheballotscast.

Is the system a fully Yes.TheproposedPCOSisafullyintegratedsingle

integrated single device as device, with builtin printer and builtin data

described in item no. 4 of communicationports(EthernetandUSB).

Component1B?
5

Does the system have a Yes.Aportionofafilled[]upmarkedovalwasblown

scanning resolution of at upusingimageeditorsoftwaretorevealthenumber
least200dpi?
ofdotsperinch.Thesampleimageshowed200dpi.
File properties of the decrypted image file also
revealed200dpi.

Does the system scan in Yes. 30 shades of gray were scanned in the test
grayscale?
PCOS machine, 20 of which were recognized,
exceeding the required 4bit/16 levels of gray as
specifiedinBidBulletinNo.19.

Does the system require Yes. The system required the use of a security key
authorization
and with different sets of passwords/PINs for
authentication
of
all AdministratorandOperatorusers.
operators, such as, but not
limited to, usernames and
passwords, with multiple
useraccesslevels?

Does the system have an Yes. The PCOS machine makes use of an LCD
electronicdisplay?
displaytoshowinformation:
ifaballotmaybeinsertedintothemachine
ifaballotisbeingprocessed
ifaballotisbeingrejected
on other instructions and information to the
voter/operator.

Does the system employ

error handling procedures,
including, but not limited to,
the use of error prompts
and
other
related
instructions?

Yes. The PCOS showed error messages on its

screenwheneveraballotisrejectedbythemachine
and gives instructions to the voter on what to do
next,orwhentherewasaballotjamerror.

10

Does the system count the

voters vote as marked on
the ballot with an accuracy
ratingofatleast99.995%?

Yes. Two rounds of tests were conducted for this

test using only valid marks/shades on the ballots.
20,000 marks were required to complete this test,
withonlyone(1)allowablereadingerror.
625 ballots with 32 marks each were used for this
test.DuringthecomparisonofthePCOSgenerated
results with the manually prepared/predetermined
results, it was found out that there were seven (7)
marks which were inadvertently missed out during
ballotpreparationbytheTWG.AlthoughthePCOS
generated results turned out to be 100% accurate,
the20,000mark[requirement]wasnotmetthereby
requiringthetesttoberepeated.
Toprepareforotherpossiblemissedoutmarks,650
ballots (with 20,800 marks) were used for the next
roundoftest,whichalsoyielded100%accuracy.

11

Doesthesystemdetectand Yes. This test made use of one (1) photocopied

reject fake or spurious, and ballot and one (1) "recreated" ballot. Both were
previouslyscannedballots? rejectedbythePCOS.
Thetestfortherejectionofpreviouslyscanned(sic)
ballots was done during the endtoend
demonstration.
Does the system scan both Yes. Four (4) ballots with valid marks were fed into

12

Does the system scan both Yes. Four (4) ballots with valid marks were fed into
sides of a ballot and in any the PCOS machine in the four (4) portrait
orientationinonepass?
orientations specified in Bid Bulletin No. 4 (either
backorfront,upsidedownorrightsideup),andall
wereaccuratelycaptured.

13

Does the system have

necessary safeguards to
determinetheauthenticityof
a ballot, such as, but not
limited to, the use of bar
codes, holograms, color
shiftingink,microprinting,to
be provided on the ballot,
whichcanberecognizedby
thesystem?

14

Yes. The system was able to recognize if the

securityfeaturesontheballotare"missing".
Aside from the test on the fake or spurious ballots
(Item No. 11), three (3) test ballots with tampered
barcodesandtimingmarkswereusedandwereall
rejectedbythePCOSmachine.
The photocopied ballot in the test for Item No. 11
was not able to replicate the UV ink pattern on the
topportionoftheballot[,]causingtherejectionofthe
ballot.

Are the names of the Yes. Two sample test ballots of different lengths
candidates preprinted on wereprovided:one(1)was14incheslongwhilethe
theballot?
other was 30 inches long. Both were 8.5 inches
wide.
The first showed 108 preprinted candidate names
for fourteen (14) contests / positions, including two
(2)surveyquestionsongenderandagegroup,and
aplebiscitequestion.
The other showed 609 preprinted candidate
names, also for fourteen (14) positions, including
three(3)surveyquestions.

15

Doeseachsideoftheballot
sheetaccommodateatleast
300 names of candidates
with a minimum font size of
10, in addition to other
mandatory
information
requiredbylaw?

Yes.The30inchballot,whichwasusedtotestItem
No. 2, contained 309 names for the national
positions and 300 names for local positions. The
totalpreprintednamesontheballottotaled609.
Thistypeoftestballotwasalsousedfortestvoting
bythepublic,includingmembersofthemedia.
ArialNarrow,fontsize10,wasusedintheprintingof
thecandidatenames.

16

Does the system recognize

full shade marks on the
appropriate space on the
ballot opposite the name of
the candidate to be voted
for?

Yes.Theballotsusedfortheaccuracytest(ItemNo.
10),whichmadeuseoffullshademarks,werealso
usedinthistestandwereaccuratelyrecognizedby
thePCOSmachine.

17

Does the system recognize Yes. Four (4) test ballots were used with one (1)
partial shade marks on the mark each per ballot showing the following pencil
appropriate space on the marks:
ballot opposite the name of
tophalfshade
the candidate to be voted
for?
bottomhalfshade
lefthalfshadeand
righthalfshade[.]
These partial shade marks were all recognized by
thePCOSmachine.

18

Does the system recognize Yes.One(1)testballotwithonecheckmark,usinga

check marks on the pencil, was used for this test. The mark was
appropriate space on the recognizedsuccessfully.

ballot opposite the name of

the candidate to be voted
for?
19

Does the system recognize Yes. One (1) yes ballot with one x mark, using a
x marks on the appropriate pencil, was used for this test. The mark was
spaceontheballotopposite recognizedsuccessfully.
the name of the candidate
tobevotedfor?

20

Does the system recognize Yes. The 1000 ballots used in the accuracy test
both pencil and ink marks (Item No. 10) were marked using the proposed
ontheballot?
markingpenbythebidder.
Aseparateballotwithone(1)pencilmarkwasalso
tested.ThismarkwasalsorecognizedbythePCOS
machine. Moreover, the tests for Items No. 17, 18
and 19 were made using pencil marks on the
ballots.

21

In a simulation of a system
shutdown,doesthesystem
have
error
recovery
features?

Yes. Five (5) ballots were used in this test. The

powercordwaspulledfromthePCOSwhilethe3rd
ballot was in the middle of the scanning procedure,
suchthatitwasleft"hanging"intheballotreader.
After resumption of the regular power supply, the
PCOSmachinewasabletorestartsuccessfullywith
notification to the operator that there were two (2)
ballots already cast in the machine. The "hanging"
3rdballotwasreturnedtotheoperatorandwasable
toberefedintothePCOSmachine.Themarkson
allfive(5)wereallaccuratelyrecognized.

22

Does the system have Yes. The PCOS was able to transmit to the CCS
transmission
and duringtheendtoenddemonstrationusing[a]Globe
consolidation/canvassing
prepaid[i]nternetkit.
capabilities?

23

Doesthesystemgeneratea Yes. The PCOS saves a backup copy of the ERs,

backup copy of the ballot images, statistical report and audit log into a
generated reports, in a CompactFlash(CF)card.
removable data storage
device?

24

Does the system have

alternative power sources,
which will enable it to fully
operate for at least 12
hours?

Yes. A 12volt 18AH battery lead acid was used in

thistest.
The initial test had to be repeated due to a short
circuit, after seven (7) hours from startup without
ballot scanning. This was explained by TIM
Smartmatic to be (sic) caused by noncomputable
wiring of the battery to the PCOS. A smaller wire
than what is required was inadvertently used,
likening the situation to incorrect wiring of a car
battery. Two (2) COMELEC electricians were called
toconfirmTIMSmartmaticsexplanation.
ThePCOSmachinewasconnectedtoregularpower
andstartedupsuccessfully.
Thefollowingday,the"retest"wascompletedin12
hoursand40minutes,startingfromtheinitialization
to the printing of the reports. 984 ballots were fed
into the machine. The ER, as generated by the
PCOS[,] was compared with the predetermined
result,showing100%accuracy.

25

Is the system capable of Yes.ThePCOSprintsreportsviaitsbuiltinprinter[,]

generating
reports?

and

printing which[reports]include:
1.InitializationReport
2.ElectionReturns(ER)
3.PCOSStatisticalReport
4.AuditLog

26

Did the bidder successfully Yes.Anendtoenddemonstrationofallproposed

demonstrate EMS, voting, systemswaspresented,covering:
counting,
importingofelectiondataintotheEMS
consolidation/canvassing
and transmission? (see B.
creationofelectionconfigurationdataforthe
Demomodel)
PCOSandtheCCSusingEMS
creationofballotfacesusingEMS
configuringthePCOSandtheCCSusingthe
EMSgeneratedelectionconfigurationfile
initialization,operation,generationofreportsand
backupusingthePCOS
electronictransmissionofresults...:
ofromthePCOStocity/municipalCCSandto
thecentralserver
ofromthecity/municipalCCStotheprovincial
CCS
ofromtheprovincialCCStothenationalCCS
receiptandcanvassoftransmittedresults:
obythecity/municipalCCSfromthePCOS
obytheprovincialCCSfromthe
city/municipalCCS
obythenationalCCSfromtheprovincial
CCS
receiptoftransmittedresultsbythecentralserver
fromthePCOS

We cannot close our eyes to the fact that the TWGs technical evaluation of the AES was corroborated by
knowledgeableandimpartialthirdparties:thelawmandatedOfficialObservers.Intheirrespectivereportstothe
COMELEC, the PPCRV and the Office of the Ombudsman found the system procured and the attendant
COMELEC proceedings to be consistent, transparent, and in consonance with the relevant laws, jurisprudence
andthetermsofreference.99
Accordingly,IdonotfindanygraveabuseofdiscretiononthepartoftheCOMELECinawardingtheAutomation
ContracttotheSmartmaticTIMCorporation.IthasapprovedthePCOSsystem,andwearebereftoftherightto
supplantitsjudgment.Hoaryistheprinciplethatthecourtswillnotinterfereinmattersthatareaddressedtothe
sound discretion of government agencies entrusted with the regulation of activities coming under their special
technicalknowledgeandtraining.100OurdisquisitionintheseminalcaseSumulongv.COMELEC101againfinds
cogentapplication:
The Commission on Elections is a constitutional body. It is intended to play a distinct and important part in our
schemeofgovernment.Inthedischargeofitsfunctions,itshouldnotbehamperedwithrestrictionsthatwouldbe
fullywarrantedinthecaseofalessresponsibleorganization.TheCommissionmayerr,sothiscourtmayalso.It
shouldbeallowedconsiderablelatitudeindevisingmeansandmethodsthatwillinsuretheaccomplishmentofthe

greater objective for which it was created free, orderly and honest elections. We may not fully agree with its
choiceofmeansbutunlesstheseareclearlyillegalorconstitutegrossabuseofdiscretion,thiscourtshouldnot
interfere. Politics is a practical matter, and political questions must be dealt with realistically not from the
standpoint of pure theory. The Commission on Elections, because of its factfinding facilities, its contacts with
politicalstrategists,anditsknowledgederivefromactualexperienceindealingwithpoliticalcontroversies,isina
peculiarlyadvantageouspositiontodecidecomplexpoliticalquestions.
xxxx
There are no readymade formulas for solving public problems. Time and experience are necessary to evolve
patternsthatwillservetheendsofgoodgovernment.Inthematteroftheadministrationofthelawsrelativetothe
conduct of elections, ..., we must not by any excessive zeal take away from the Commission on Elections the
initiative which by constitutional and legal mandates properly belongs to it. Due regard to the independent
characteroftheCommission,asordainedintheConstitution,requiresthatthepowerofthisCourttoreviewthe
actsofthatbodyshould,asageneralproposition,beusedsparingly,butfirmlyinappropriatecases.Wearenot
satisfiedthatthepresentsuitisoneofsuchcases.(Emphasissupplied.)
As the ultimate guardian of the Constitution, we have the distinguished but delicate duty of determining and
defining constitutional meaning, divining constitutional intent, and deciding constitutional disputes.102
Nonetheless,thispowerdoesnotspelljudicialsuperiority(forthejudiciaryiscoequalwiththeotherbranches)or
judicialtyranny(foritissupposedtobetheleastdangerousbranch).103Thus,whenevertheCourtexercisesits
function of checking the excesses of any branch of government, it is also dutybound to check itself.104 The
systemofdividedandinterlockingpowersofthebranchesofgovernmentarecarefullyblendedsoastoproduce
a complex system of checks and balances that preserve the autonomy of each branch, without which
independencecanbecomesupremacy.
PetitionersdisparagethetechnicaltestandendtoenddemonstrationconductedbytheCOMELECforhaving
beendonemerelyformediamileage.Thisbaselessaccusationiseasilydismissedbyrepairingtothe
presumptionofregularityofofficialacts.AsweruledinTheProvinceofAgusandelNortev.Commissionon
Elections,etal.:
Appropriately, the Constitution invests the COMELEC with broad power to enforce and administer all laws and
regulationsrelativetotheconductofanelection,plebisciteandotherelectoralexercises.Inthedischargeofits
legal duties, the COMELEC is provided by the law with tools, ample wherewithal, and considerable latitude in
adoptingmeansthatwillensuretheaccomplishmentofthegreatobjectivesforwhichitwascreatedtopromote
free, orderly and honest elections.105 Conceived by the charter as the effective instrument to preserve the
sanctity of popular suffrage, endowed with independence and all the needed concomitant powers, COMELEC
deserves to be accorded by the Court the greatest measure of presumption of regularity in its course of action
andchoiceofmeansinperformingitsduties,totheendthatitmayachieveitsdesignedplaceinthedemocratic
fabricofourgovernment.106(Emphasissupplied.)
The COMELEC is a constitutional body, mandated to play a distinct and important role in the governmental
scheme.Intheperformanceofitsconstitutionalduties,itmustbegivenarangeofauthorityandflexibility,forthe
artofgoodgovernmentrequirescooperationandharmonyamongthebranches.Wemaynotagreefullywiththe
choicesanddecisionsthattheCOMELECmakes,butabsentanyconstitutionalassault,statutorybreachorgrave
abuseofdiscretion,weshouldneversubstituteourjudgmentforitsown.
c.8NoabdicationbytheCOMELECofitsdutytoenforceelectionlaws
The petitioners assert that the COMELEC abdicated its constitutional duty to enforce and administer all laws
relative to the conduct of elections, and to decide all questions affecting elections when it entered into the
AutomationContractwithSmartmaticTIMCorporation.
Article3.3ofthecontractforthe2010ElectionsAutomationProjectprovides:
Article3.3ThePROVIDERshallbeliableforallitsobligationsunderthisProject,andtheperformanceofportions
thereofbyotherpersonsorentitiesnotpartiestothisContractshallnotrelievethePROVIDERofsaidobligations
andconcomitantliabilities.
SMARTMATIC, as the joint venture partner with the greater track record in automated elections, shall be in
charge of the technical aspects of the counting and canvassing software and hardware, including transmission
configuration and system integration. SMARTMATIC shall also be primarily responsible for preventing and
troubleshootingtechnicalproblemsthatmayariseduringtheelection.
The PROVIDER must provide to SMARTMATIC at all times the support required to perform the above
responsibilities.(Emphasissupplied.)

Petitioners claim that under this Article 3.3, the COMELEC has surrendered to Smartmatic the supervision and
controlofthesystemtobeusedfortheAESinviolationofsection26ofRA8436.
ThepetitionersalsorefertoCOMELECBidBulletinNo.10,107whichwasmadeanintegralpartoftheAutomation
Contract by virtue of Articles 21.1 and 21.4 of the contract.108 Bid Bulletin No. 10 provides that the "digital
signatureshallbeassignedbythewinningbiddertoallmembersoftheBoardofElectionInspectors(BOI)and
thecity,municipal,provincialordistrictBoardofCanvassers(BOC)."SinceSmartmaticwouldhaveaccesstothe
digital signatures and would have the authority to assign the access keys to the BEI and BOC, the petitioners
readilyconcludethattheCOMELEChasabdicateditsconstitutionalmandatetoenforceelectionlaws.Whatthe
petitioners failed to consider is that, although the digital signature shall be assigned by the winning bidder, Bid
BulletinNo.10furtherprovidesthatthecertificateofauthorityforthedigitalsignaturesmuststillbeapprovedby
theCOMELEC.Thus,theCOMELECretainscontrolovertheprocessofgenerationanddistributionofthedigital
signatures.
Abdicationdenotesarelinquishmentorsurrenderofauthority,whichhasnotbeendonebytheCOMELEC.PartII
oftheTOR/RFPprovides:
TheCommissiononElections(COMELEC),throughitsBidsandAwardsCommittee(BAC),iscurrentlyaccepting
bidsforthelease,withanoptiontopurchase,ofanautomatedelectionsystem(AES)thatwillmeetthefollowing
needs:
xxxx
6. A complete solutions provider, and not just a vendor, which can provide experienced and effective overall
nationwideprojectmanagementserviceandtotalcustomersupport(coveringallareasofprojectimplementation
including technical support, training, information campaign support, civil and electrical works service,
warehousing,deployment,installationandpullout,contingencyplanning,etc.),underCOMELECsupervisionand
control,toensureeffectiveandsuccessfulimplementationoftheProject.(Emphasissupplied.)
The COMELEC identified the type of technology, specifications and capabilities of the system to be used in the
2010 elections and the bidders were required to submit their bids in accordance with the COMELECs
stipulations. All the choices made by the winning bidder were to be subject to approval by the COMELEC, and
"thefinaldesignandfunctionalityofthesystemshallstillbesubjectto[its]finalcustomizationrequirements."109
ItisclearthattheCOMELEChasnotabdicateditsconstitutionalandlegalmandatetocontrolandsupervisethe
elections.SmartmaticandTIMaremerelyserviceprovidersorlessorsofgoodsandservicestotheCommission.
Indeed,Article6.7oftheAutomationContract,providesthat"theentireprocessofvoting,counting,transmission,
consolidationandcanvassingofvotesshallbeconductedbyCOMELECspersonnelandofficials."
This control and supervision by the COMELEC was assured in the June 23, 2009 hearing of the Senate
Committee on Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes and Laws. This is reflected in the following
exchangebetweenSenatorFrancisEscuderoandCOMELECExecutiveDirectorJoseTolentino,thus:
"THECHAIRMAN.Willyoudeputizetheworkforceofthewinningbidder?Orareyougoingtodeputizebywayof
additionaltechnologicalsupportthestudents?
MR.TOLENTINO.Itwouldbethestudents,Mr.Chairman,whomwewilldeputize.
Withrespecttotheproviders(sic)technicalsupport,weconsiderthemaspartners.So,thereisreallynoneedfor
ustodeputizethembecausethesupervisionandcontroloverthecountingcenterwouldbesolelyonthepartof
theComelec.
THE CHAIRMAN. Pero pwede ho nilang pakialaman yung makina, hindi po ba? Puwede nilang kalikutin yon,
galawinyon,kasingakungmaypalpak,diba?
So theyre employees of Smartmatic without any counterpart authorization or deputization from Comelec. So,
anyone can just walk in [and] say, "I am an employee of Smartmatic. Something is wrong with the machine. Ill
checkit."
MR.TOLENTINO.No.Itdoesntworkthatway,Mr.Chairman.
Firstofall,asidefromourEOwhowouldbegoingaroundalloverthemunicipalitytocheckonthepollingcenters,
ComelecasidefromourInformationTechnologyDepartmentpersonnel,wouldalsobegoingaroundtodetermine
thestatusofthemachinesonelectionday.
AndIamevensurethatthewatchersofthepoliticalpartiesandthecandidateswill[not]allowanyonetotoucha
machineifheisnotamemberoftheBoardofElectionInspector(sic).

THECHAIRMAN.Butsir,theworkforceofonsitetechniciansarenotallowedtotouchthemachines?Something
iswrongwiththemachine,whoisauthorizedto...
MR.TOLENTINO.Yes,sir.Onlywhenthereisaproblemwiththemachine.
THECHAIRMAN.Preciselymypoint,sir.So,thenthesepeoplebeatleastknowntoComelec.
MR.TOLENTINO.Yes,Mr.Chairman.Infact,theyllbegivenappropriateidentificationcards...
THECHAIRMAN.FromComelec.
MR.TOLENTINO.Yes,Mr.Chairman.
THECHAIRMAN.Thatwasmyquestion,sir.Becauseyousaidawhileago,theyreemployeesonlyofSmartmatic
andyouhaveBEI,anyway.
So,...underthecontrolandsupervisiondinsilangComelec.
MR.TOLENTINO.Yes,Mr.Chairman.
THECHAIRMAN.Yes."(Emphasissupplied.)110
Finally,thepoweranddutyoftheCOMELECtoadministerelectionlawsandtohavecontrolandsupervisionover
the automated elections is not incompatible with the decision to subcontract services that may be better
performed by those who are wellequipped to handle complex technological matters with respect to the
implementationoftheAES.ThesubcontractorcannotactindependentlyoftheCOMELEC.
D.Conclusion
WearenotunawareofthemanydoomsdayscenariospeddledbydoubtingThomasesifthecomingMay2010
elections will be fully automated. To downgrade these scenarios, let it be emphasized that the PCOS System
procured by COMELEC is a paperbased system. It has a provision for system auditability and a voterverified
papertrail.Theofficialballotsmaybecomparedwiththeirdigitalimagesstoredinthememorycards.Allactions
doneonthemachinearestoredandcanbeprintedoutbytheBEIchairpersonasanauditlog,whichincludes
timestamps.AndintheeventofproblemsarisingfromnonfunctioningPCOSmachines,theofficialballotscastin
theprecincts,whichhavepreviouslybeenfedintothelockedballotbox,couldbeusedforamanualrecount.With
thesesafeguards,thefearofautomationfailureshouldnotoverwhelmus.
Wehavebeenbedevilledinthepastbyelectionsthatarenotfree,fairandhonest.Theseelectionshavemadea
mockeryofourdemocracyfortheyfrustratedthesovereignrightofthepeopletochoosewhooughttorulethem.
These elections have also resulted in instability of governments whose legitimacy has been placed in doubt. All
these elections were conducted manually. For the first time, we shall be conducting our May 2010 elections
throughfullautomation.Tobesure,fullautomationwillnotcompletelycleansethedirtinourelectoralsystem.But
itisabigforwardstepwhichcanleadustothegatewayofrealdemocracywherethevoteofthepeopleissacred
andsupreme.
Accordingly,IvotetoDISMISSthepetition.
REYNATOS.PUNO
ChiefJustice

Footnotes
1constitution,Art.VIII,Sec.1.
2 An Act Authorizing the Commission on Elections to Use an Automated Election System in the May 11,

1998NationalorLocalElectionsandinSubsequentNationalandLocalElectoralExercises,providingfunds
thereforandforotherpurposes.
3G.R.No.159139,January13,2004,419SCRA141.
4RepublicActNo.9369(2007),Sec.6,amendingRepublicActNo.8436(1997),Sec.5.
5RepublicActNo.9369(2007),Sec.12.

6 An Act Appropriating the Sum of Eleven Billion Three Hundred One Million Seven Hundred Ninety

ThousandPesos(P11,301,790,000.00)AsSupplementalAppropriationsforanAutomatedElectionSystem
andforOtherPurposes.
7COMELECResolutionNo.8608,InTheMatterOfTheReport/RecommendationOfTheSpecialBidsAnd

AwardsCommitteeRelativeToTheAwardOfTheContractForTheMay10,2010AutomatedElections,09
June2009.
8 The COMELEC Advisory Council is chaired by Ray Anthony RoxasChua III (from the Commission on

InformationandCommunicationsTechnology)anditsmembersareGeronimoL.Sy(fromtheDepartment
ofEducation),FortunatoDeLaPena(fromtheDepartmentofScienceandTechnology),ManuelC.Ramos,
Jr. (from the University of the Philippines), Renato B. Garcia (from the Philippine Electronics and
TelecommunicationsFederation,Inc.),LiliaC.Guillermo(fromtheChiefInformationOfficersForum,Inc.),
Ivan John E. Uy (from the Philippine Computer Society), Henrietta T. De Villa (from the Parish Pastoral
CouncilforResponsibleVoting)andAndieC.Lasala(fromtheCommissiononElectoralReforms).
9TheTaskForceiscomposedofOrlandoC.Casimiro,EvelynBaliton,RafaelRodriguezHipolito,GinaLyn

Lucas, Mary Rawnsle Lopez, Judy Anne DoctorEscalona, Manolette Eugenio, Mary Antonette Yalao,
MarinaDemetrio,HilarioFabila,Jr.andMarianCandelaria.
10RepublicActNo.8436(1997),Sec.6.
11RepublicActNo.8436(1997),Sec.5.
12Id.
13Id.
14Id.
15TheJointCongressionalOversightCommitteeonAutomatedElectionSystemwascreatedpursuantto

Section 27 of RA 8436, as amended. It was formerly chaired by Senator Richard Gordon, and now by
SenatorFrancisEscudero.TheformerSenateMembersare:SenatorJuanPonceEnrile,SenatorEdgardo
Angara,SenatorLitoLapid,SenatorLorenLegarda,SenatorManuelRoxasII,andSenatorM.A.Consuelo
Madrigal. The present Senate members are: Senator Loren Legarda, Senator M.A. Consuelo Madrigal,
Senator Manuel Roxas II, Senator Francis Pangilinan, Senator Alan Cayetano, and Senator Aquilino
Pimentel. The House Panel is composed of: Representative Teodoro Locsin, Representative Edcel
Lagman, Representative Rufus Rodriguez, Representative Abdullah Dimaporo, Representative Martin
Romualdez,RepresentativeAbigailBinay,andRepresentativeRomanGabrielTecsonRomulo.
16TSN,JointCongressionalOversightCommitteeonAutomatedElectionSystem,March11,2008,I2,p.

30.
17TSN,JointCongressionalOversightCommitteeonAutomatedElectionSystem,March11,2008,pp.34

35.
18RecordoftheSenate,Vol.3,SessionNo.23,September13,2006,pp.133134.
19Id.atpp.181184.
20Id.atp.136.
21Id.atpp.136137.
22Id.atp.137.
23Id.
24 An Act Appropriating the Sum of Eleven Billion Three Hundred One Million, Seven Hundred Ninety

ThousandPesos,March5,2009.
25DeliberationsoftheHouseofRepresentatives,February4,2009,pp.2122.
26Id.atpp.6971.

27TSN,JointCongressionalOversightCommitteeonAutomatedElectionSystemHearingonSeptember1,

2008,PartII2,p.74.
28Id.atPartV2,p.104.
29TSN,JointCongressionalOversightCommitteeonAutomatedElectionSystemHearingonSeptember9,

2008,PartII1,pp.2123.
30Mr.JoseTolentinoistheExecutiveDirectorofCOMELEC.
31Id.atpartIV1,p.31.
32 TSN, Joint Congressional Oversight Committee on Automated Election System Hearing on March 4,

2009,PartV2,pp.117118.
33SenatorEdgardoAngara.
34TSN,HearingoftheSenateCommitteeonFinance,February2,2009,PartIV1,p.4.
35Tev.Bell,G.R.No.8866,November19,1914.
36Supranote3.
37RA9369,Section1states:

"Section1.Section1ofRepublicActNo.8436isherebyamendedtoreadasfollows:
"Section1.DeclarationofPolicy
xxx
The State recognizes the mandate and authority of the Commission to prescribe the adoption and
use of the most suitable technology of demonstrated capability taking into account the situation
prevailingintheareaandthefundsavailableforthepurpose.""(Emphasissupplied)
38Id.,Section6provides:

"Sec.6.Section6ofRepublicActNo.8436isherebyamendedtoreadasfollows:
"Sec.5.AuthoritytoUseanAutomatedElectionSystem.Tocarryouttheabovestatedpolicy,the
Commission on Elections, herein referred to as the Commission, is hereby authorized to use an
automated election system or systems in the same election in different provinces, whether paper
basedoradirectrecordingelectronicelectionsystemasitmaydeemappropriateandpracticalfor
the process of voting, counting of votes and canvassing/consolidation and transmittal of results of
electoralexercises:xxx"(Emphasissupplied)
39Supranote37.
40 Mr. Justice Kapunans Concurring Opinion, AKBAYAN Youth, et al. v. Commission on Elections, G.R.

No.147066,March26,2001,citingLansangvs.Garcia,42SCRA448(1971).
41JGSummitHoldings,Inc.v.CourtofAppeals,etal.,G.R.No.124293,September24,2003.
42G.R.No.75875,15December1989,180SCRA130.
43IssuedonApril18,2009.
44IssuedonApril20,2009.
45 The incorporation of a JVC was done pursuant to Article 2 of the Joint Venture Agreement which

provides,inrelevantpart:
"2.1. In the event that COMELEC declares the bid tendered by TIM and SMARTMATIC to be the
winning bid for the Automation Project, the parties hereto shall incorporate, or cause to be
incorporated, the JVC which shall be names "TIM SMARTMATIC CORPORATION", or any other

nameacceptabletothepartieswhichmaybeallowedbytheSEC.
2.2. The JVC shall be the corporate vehicle through which the joint venture of TIM and
SMARTMATICshallbecarriedoutforthepurposesetforthinArticle2.3hereunder.TheJVCshall
be the entity which shall enter into a contract with the COMELEC for the Automation Project of the
2010NationalElections.
xxxx"
46Infra.
47JointVentureAgreement,Chapeaustates:

"This Joint Venture Agreement ("the Agreement") is made and entered into this 23rd day of April
2009atMakatiCity,MetroManilabyandbetween:
TOTAL INFORMATION MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, a corporation duly organized under the
laws of the Republic of the Philippines, with address at 5600 South Superhighway corner Arellano
Street,MakatiCity,Philippines,representedhereinbyitsPresidentandChairmanoftheBoard,Mr.
JoseMariM.Antunez("TIM")
and
SMARTMATIC INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, a corporation organized and existing under the
lawsofBarbados,withaddressatN4StaffordHouse,GarrisonSavannah,St.Michael,Barbados
W.I. BB 14038, and a fullyowned subsidiary of SMARTMATIC INTERNATIONAL HOLDING, B.V., a
corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of [the] Netherlands, represented herein by
itsauthorizedrepresentative,Mr.JuanC.Villa,Jr.("SMARTMATIC")
xxxx"(emphasisintheoriginal)
48Id.,Article2.3.
49Id.,Article2.4.
50Id.,Article2.5.
51Id.,Article3.
52TheTOR/RFPspecifies,inrelevantpart:

"COMPONENT3
OVERALLPROJECTMANAGEMENT
xxxx
The scope of the work is to assist the COMELEC in ensuring the successful implementation of the
Project.
Theprojectmanagementservicescomponentofthe2010NationalandLocalElectionsProjectshall
include:
1.Projectmanagement,includingteamorganizationandimplementationschedule
2.Physicalsitedesign,preparationandoperationalization
3.Qualitycontrolandassurance
4.Changemanagement,includingvotereducationandtraining
5.Riskmanagementandcontingencyplanning
6.Configurationmanagement
xxxx
53JointVentureAgreement,supranote47,Article4.1.

54Id.,Article4.7.
55Id.,Article7.1.
56Id.,Article11.1.
57Id.,Article13.1.
58InformationTechnologyofthePhilippines,etal.v.COMELEC,etal.,infra.
59Id.
60Id.
61Davidv.CommissiononElections,etal.,G.R.No.127116,April8,1997,271SCRA90.
62Id.
63Leverizav.IntermediateAppellateCourt,157SCRA282(1988),citingSto.Domingov.delosAngeles,

96SCRA139.
64Id,citingWilWilhensenInc.v.Baluyot,83SCRA38.
65UnderSection23.11.1oftheImplementingRulesandRegulationsofRA9184,thefollowingarequalified

tobidintheprocurementofgoods:
(1)DulylicensedFilipinocitizens/proprietorships
(2)PartnershipsdulyorganizedunderthelawsofthePhilippinesandofwhichatleastsixtypercent
(60%)oftheinterestbelongstocitizensofthePhilippines
(3)CorporationsdulyorganizedunderthelawsofthePhilippines,andofwhichatleastsixtypercent
(60%)oftheoutstandingcapitalstockbelongstocitizensofthePhilippines
(4)Manufacturers,suppliersand/ordistributorsformingthemselvesintoajointventure,i.e.,agroup
oftwo(2)ormoremanufacturers,suppliersand/ordistributorsthatintendtobejointlyandseverally
responsibleorliableforaparticularcontract,providedthatFilipinoownershiporinterestofthejoint
ventureconcernedthereofshallbeatleastsixtypercent(60%)and
(5)CooperativesdulyregisteredwiththeCooperativesDevelopmentAuthority(CDA).
ItmustbenotedthatthisenumerationdoesnotappearinthetextofRA9184itself.However,Iwill
desist from inquiring into whether the Implementing Rules and Regulations unduly enlarged the
scopeofthelaw,forthiscaseisnottheproperavenuetoruleonthisissue.Itsufficestosaythat(i)
RA9184doesnotimposeamandatoryFilipinoForeignequityceilingfortheprocurementofgoods,
astobringintoapplicationtheAntiDummyLawinthiscase,and(ii)theeventualadoptionintothe
TOR/RFPofthetextoftheIRRwasmadebyCOMELECinthefreeexerciseofitsdiscretion.
66Article4.3provides:

"4.3AquorumforameetingoftheBoardofDirectorsshallrequirethepresenceofatleastthree(3)
Directors,Provided,thatatleastone(1)DirectornominatedbyeachofTIMandSMARTMATICare
present."
67Article4.5provides:

"ThefollowingactsoftheBoardofDirectorsoftheJVCshallrequiretheauthorizationandapproval
bytheaffirmativevoteofatleastthree(3)Directors,one(1)ofwhommustbeaDirectornominated
byTIMandone(1)ofwhommustbeaDirectornominatedbySmartmatic:
a) Approval of the operating and capital expenditures budgets for each fiscal year, including the
setting of relevant policies and guidelines for implementation of the capex program, as well as any
expenditures in excess of the approved capex budget and any deviation from the policies and
guidelinespertinentthereto
b)Approvaloftheauditedfinancialstatements

c)Electionorremovalofthecorporateofficers,andseniorofficerswitharankofVicePresidentor
higher, the terms and conditions of their employment, and the adoption of, or change in, their
compensationpackage,includingperdiemsandbonuses
d)Approvalofthefinancialplanforeachfiscalyear,embodyingtheapprovedborrowinglimitsofthe
Corporation,aswellasanyborrowingsinexcessofsaidlimits
e)Enteringorterminatinganyagreementinvolvingtechnologytransfer
f) Delegation of powers and duties to individual directors or officers, and delegation of powers to
committees
g) Approval of any contract between the JVC and TIM or SMARTMATIC, involving more than
Philippine Pesos: Ten Million Pesos (PHP10,000,000.00), with the exception of (i) those contracts
contemplatedunderthisAgreement(ii)thosecontractsforthepurchase,supply,leaseorotherkind
ofcontractwithrespecttoequipments(sic)orservicestobeprovidedbySMARTMATICreflectedin
the budget approved by the Board of Directors and (iii) those contracts for the purchase of raw
materials,suppliesandsparepartsrequiredbytheJVCintheordinarycourseofbusiness,Provided
always,thatthetermsandconditionsofsuchcontractsshallbecompetitivewiththosebeingoffered
byothersuppliersand
h)AnymatternotspecifiedintheagendasetforthinthenoticesoftheBoardmeetings."
68Article4.7provides:

"4.7TheBoardofDirectorsmaycreateanEXCOMwhichshallconsistofatleastthree(3)Directors,
two must be Directors nominated by TIM and another must be a Director nominated by
SMARTMATIC.
A quorum at any meeting of the EXCOM shall require the presence of a majority of the entire
membership of the EXCOM, Provided, that at least one (1) Director representing TIM and one (1)
[D]irectorrepresentingSMARTMATICarepresent.
TheEXCOMwillhavetheauthoritytopassuponanddecideanymatter,whichmaybedelegatedto
itbytheBoardofDirectors,excepttheimportantmattersandactionsprovidedinArticle4.5above
andArticle5.3ofthisAgreement.
Every decision of at least a majority of the members of the EXCOM at which there is a quorum
presentshallbevalidasacorporateact."
69Article4.10provides:

"4.10AtalltimeswhilethisAgreementisineffect,SMARTMATICshallhavetherighttonominatethe
followingofficers:
a.ChairmanoftheBoard
b.Treasurerand
c.CorporateSecretary."
70Article4.11provides:

"4.11ThepartiesshallcausetheirrespectiveDirectorstovotetheindividualsnominatedbyTIMand
SMARTMATIC in accordance with Articles 4.9 and 4.10 hereof. In case of resignation, retirement,
deathordisabilityofanyofficer,thepartythatnominatedtheofficerwhoseresignation,retirement,
deathordisabilityoccasionedthevacancyshallnominatetheindividualtofillsuchvacancy,andthe
parties agree to cause its nominee Directors to vote to elect to the position vacated the individual
nominatedbythepartywhichnominatedtheofficerwhoresigned,retired,diedorwasdisabledfrom
office."
71TherelevantportionoftheInstructionstoBiddersofSBACBidBulletinNo.21provides:

"(e) The JV member with a greater track record in automated elections shall be incharge of the
technical aspects of the counting and canvassing software and hardware, including transmission
configurationandsystemsintegrationxxx"

72Section3.3oftheAutomationContractprovidesinrelevantpart:

"xxxx
SMARTMATIC,asthejointventurepartnerwiththegreatertrackrecordinautomatedelections,shall
be in charge of the technical aspects of the counting and canvassing software and hardware,
including transmission configuration and systems integration. SMARTMATIC shall also be primarily
responsibleforpreventingandtroubleshootingtechnicalproblemsthatmayariseduringtheelection.
xxxx"
73TSN,JointCongressionalOversightCommitteeonAutomatedElectionSystem,April20,2009,pp.61

63.
74Id.,p.67.
75Id.,p.71.
76 Atty. Ferdinand Rafanan is the Director of the Law Department of the COMELEC. He is also the

ChairmanoftheCOMELECSBAC.
77Supranote73,p.71.
78Id.,pp.8085.
79ThiswassupposedtobeahearingoftheJointCommitteeonAES,butRepresentativeLocsin(Chairof

the House Panel) was indisposed and was not able to attend. As such, only the Senate Committee on
Constitutional Amendments, Revision of Codes and Laws was convened, with the understanding that the
recordsofthehearingweretobereproducedintheJointCommitteeonAES.
80Mr.FerdinandRafananistheHeadoftheCOMELECLegalDepartment.
81 TSN, Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments, Revision of Codes and Laws, June 23, 2009,

pp.4045.
82Article4.9provides:

"4.9AtalltimeswhilethisAgreementisineffect,TIMshallhavetherighttonominatethefollowing
officers:
a.PresidentandChiefExecutiveOfficerand
b.AssistantCorporateSecretary."
83JointVentureAgreement,Article4.12.
84Section12ofRA8436,asamended,setsforththepriorsuccessfulusequalificationasfollows:

"SEC. 12. Procurement of Equipment and Materials. To achieve the purpose of this Act, the
Commission is authorized to procure, in accordance with existing laws, by purchase, lease, rent or
otherformsofacquisition,supplies,equipment,materials,software,facilitiesandotherservices,from
localorforeignsourcesfreefromtaxesandimportduties,subjecttoaccountingandauditingrules
andregulations.WithrespecttotheMay10,2010electionsandsucceedingelectoralexercises,the
systemprocuredmusthavedemonstratedcapabilityandbeensuccessfullyusedinapriorelectoral
exercise here or abroad. Participation in the 2007 pilot exercise shall not be conclusive of the
system'sfitness."(Emphasissupplied)
85 Daniel P. Tokaji, The Paperless Chase: Electronic Voting and Democratic Values, 73 Fordham L. Rev.

1711 (2005), citing Eric A. Fischer, Voting Technologies in the United States: Overview and Issues for
Congress2(2001).
86Id.,citingalsoR.MichaelAlvarezetal.,CountingBallotsandthe2000Election:WhatWentWrong?,in

RethinkingtheVote:ThePoliticsandProspectsofAmericanElectoralReform34,39(AnnN.Crigleretal.
eds.,2004).

87Id.,citingCaltech/MITVotingTech.Project,Voting:WhatIs,WhatCouldBe18(2001).
88 U.S. General Accounting Office, Elections: Elections Voting Offers Opportunities and Presents

Challenges (GAO Report No. GAO04766T) (2004). Note that the AES procured by COMELEC from
SmartmaticTIMCorporationentailstheelectronictransmissionofthetallyresultsfromthepollingplaceto
thecentraltallylocation.
89Id.
90Id.
91COMELECAdvisoryCouncilPostelectionReportontheUseofAutomatedElectionSystem(AES)inthe

2008 ARMM Elections Submitted to the Joint Congressional Oversight Committee on Automated Election
SystemandtheCommissiononElections(October2008),at4.
92Id.at16.
93 As a point of clarification, the CCOS machines used during the 2008 ARMM elections, as well as the

PCOSmachinesofferedbytheSmartmaticTIMCorporationforthe2010elections,donotusetheOptical
MarkReader(OMR)technology.ThisisevidentfromthestatementsofCOMELECExecutiveDirectorJose
M.TolentinoduringtheFebruary2,2009hearingoftheSenateCommitteeonFinance,asfollows:
"MR. TOLENTINO. So there are three technologies recommended by the Advisory Council [for the
2010elections].WehavetheDirectRecordingElectronicortheDREwhereinallthatthevoterhasto
doistopressatouchpadoratouchscreen.IntheARMM,withthevoterspressedthephotograph
ofthecandidateofhischoice.
The two other technologies would be the Precinct Count Optical Scan and Central Count Optical
Scan. Youll note that the last two are both optical scans, meaning they scan the ballot and they
actuallytakephotographsoftheballot.Theonlydifferencebeingtheprecinctcountwouldbeatthe
precinctlevelwhilethecentralcountwouldbeinstalledormachinesinstalledatthevotingcenter.
xxxx
MR.TOLENTINO.xxxx
And we also included a small slide on the difference between the optical scan and the OMR.
EverybodythinksthatOMRandopticalscanareoneandthesameandtheyarethesameonlywith
respect to the use of a paper ballot. However, the optical scan scans the entire ballot while OMR
readsmarksonly.[An]importantfeaturetherewouldbe,inanopticalscan,thesystemcantakethe
photographoftheballotwhichisactuallyasecondpapertrailoftheballot.
THECHAIRMAN[SEN.ANGARA].Whichonedidyoutestduringthe
MR.TOLENTINO.WecalleditOMR,butactuallyintheARMM,itwasalreadyanopticalscan.
THECHAIRMAN.OMR?
MR. TOLENTINO. Yeah, we called it the OMR but actually the system is already an optical scan."
(Emphasissupplied.)
94ThelawspecificallyrequiresthattheAEStobeprocuredbyCOMELECmustatleasthavethefollowing

functionalcapabilities:
(a)Adequatesecurityagainstunauthorizedaccess
(b)Accuracyinrecordingandreadingofvotesaswellasinthetabulation,consolidation/canvassing,
electronictransmission,andstorageofresults
(c)Errorrecoveryincaseofnoncatastrophicfailureofdevice
(d) System integrity which ensures physical stability and functioning of the vote recording and
countingprocess
(e)Provisionforvoterverifiedpaperaudittrail
(f) System auditability which provides supporting documentation for verifying the correctness of

reportedelectionresults
(g) An election management system for preparing ballots and programs for use in the casting and
countingofvotesandtoconsolidate,reportanddisplayelectionresultsintheshortesttimepossible
(h)Accessibilitytoilliteratesanddisabledvoters
(i)Votetabulatingprogramforelection,referendumorplebiscite
(j)Accurateballotcounters
(k)Dataretentionprovision
(l) Provide for the safekeeping, storing and archiving of physical or paper resource used in the
electionprocess
(m)Utilizeorgenerateofficialballotsashereindefined
(n)Providethevoterasystemofverificationtofindoutwhetherornotthemachinehasregistered
hischoiceand
(o)Configureaccesscontrolforsensitivesystemdataandfunctions.
95SeeSections1and5ofRA8436,asamended.
96 The TWG was composed of twentytwo (22) representatives from the COMELEC Information

Technology Department, COMELEC Internal Audit Office, the offices of each of the COMELEC
Commissioners,theNationalComputerCenterandtheDepartmentofScienceandTechnology.
97 Systems Evaluation Consolidated Report and Status Report on the PostQualification Evaluation

Procedures,June1,2009,p.1.
98Id.,pp.26.
99OfficialObserversReportontheAESBiddingProcessbyDr.ArwinA.SerranoofthePPCRV(Annex10

of Public Respondents Memorandum) Observation Report of the Ombudsman Task Force: "Poll
Automation"(Annex11ofPublicRespondentsMemorandum).
100SeeEspinosav.Makalintal,79Phil.134(1947)Colosov.BoardofAccountancy,92Phil938(1953)

Pajo v. Ago, 108 Phil. 905 (1960) Suarez v. Reyes, G.R. No. L19828, February 28, 1963, 7 SCRA 461
Ganitanov.SecretaryofAgricultureandNaturalResources,G.R.No.L21167,March31,1966,16SCRA
543Villegasv.AuditorGeneral,G.R.No.L21352,November29,1966,18SCRA877Manuelv.Villena,
G.R.No.L28218,February27,1971,37SCRA745Lacuestav.Herrera,G.R.No.L33646,January28,
1975,62SCRA115LiangaBayLoggingCo.,Inc.v.Enage,G.R.No.L30637,July16,1987,152SCRA
80FelipeYsmael,Jr.&Co.,Inc.v.TheDeputyExecutiveSecretary,etal.,G.R.No.79538.October18,
1990 Concerned Officials of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) v. Vasquez, et
al.,G.R.No.109113,January25,1995FirstLepantoCeramics,Inc.v.CourtofAppeals,etal.,G.R.No.
117680,February9,1996.
101G.R.No.48609,October10,1941,73Phil.288.
102Duenasv.HouseofRepresentativesElectoralTribunal,etal.,G.R.No.185401,July21,2009.
103Id.
104Id.
105 Citing Cauton v. COMELEC, G.R. No. L25467, April 27, 1967, 19 SCRA 911 Pangandaman v.

COMELEC,G.R.No.134340,November25,1999,319SCRA283.
106CitingAratucv.COMELEC,G.R.Nos.L4970509,February8,1979,88SCRA251.
107IssuedbytheCOMELECSBAConApril15,2009.
108Article21ContractDocuments

21.1"ContractDocuments"referstothefollowingdocuments,andthey[sic]areherebyincorporated
andmadeintegralpartsofthisContract:
xxxx
21.4ThisContract,togetherwiththeContractDocuments,constitutestheentireagreementbetween
theparties.xxx
109RequestforProposal,PartIV,item33.
110 TSN, Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments and Revision of Codes and Laws, June 23,

2009,pp.9597.
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

DISSENTINGOPINION
CARPIO,J.:
I vote to grant the petition in part. The stipulations in the Contract1 between the Commission on Elections
(COMELEC),ontheonehand,andTotalInformationManagement,Inc.,(TIM)andSmartmaticInternational,Inc.,
(Smartmatic),ontheother,implementinganationwideautomatedelectioninthe10May2010elections,are
voidforbeingviolativeofSection5andSection26ofRepublicActNo.8436(RA8436),asamendedby
RepublicActNo.9369(RA9369).
Section 5 of RA 8436, as amended, mandates a pilot or partial automation before a nationwide automated
electionsystemcanbeimplemented.Section26ofthesamelawvestsontheCOMELEC"exclusivecontroland
supervision" over the automated election system. The Contract violates these provisions of RA 8436, as
amended.
Background
On23January2007,CongresspassedRA9369amendingthefirstautomatedelectionlaw,RA8436.2Section5
of RA 8436, as amended by RA 9369, which amendment took effect on 10 February 2007, authorized the
COMELECto:
[U]seanautomatedelectionsystemorsystemsinthesameelectionindifferentprovinces,whetherpaperbased
or a direct recording automated election system as it may deem appropriate and practical for the process of
voting,countingofvotesandcanvassing/consolidationandtransmittalofresultsofelectoralexercises:Provided,
thatfortheregularnationalandlocalelection,whichshallbeheldimmediatelyaftereffectivityofthisAct,theAES
shallbeusedinatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao,to
be chosen by the Commission x x x x In succeeding regular national or local elections, the AES shall be
implementednationwide.(Emphasissupplied)
TheCOMELECdidnotuseanyautomatedelectionsysteminthe14May2007elections,thenationalandlocal
electionsheldafterRA9369tookeffect.
On10July2009,theCOMELEC,ontheonehand,andTIMandSmartmatic(Provider),ontheother,signedthe
Contract for the automated tallying and recording of votes cast nationwide in the 10 May 2010 elections. For
P7,191,484,739.48, the COMELEC leased for use in the 10 May 2010 elections 82,200 optical scanners (and
relatedequipment)andhiredancillaryservicesoftheProvider.3
On9July2009,petitioners,astaxpayersandcitizens,filedthispetition4toenjointhesigningoftheContractorits
implementation and to compel disclosure of the terms of the Contract and other agreements between the
Provider and its subcontractors.5 Petitioners sought the Contracts invalidation for noncompliance with the
requirement in Section 5 of RA 8436, as amended, mandating the partial use of an automated election system
beforedeployingitnationwide.TofurthersupporttheirclaimontheContractsinvalidity,petitionersallegedthat
(1) the optical scanners leased by the COMELEC "do not satisfy the minimum systems capabilities" under RA
8436,asamendedand(2)theProvidernotonlyfailedtosubmitrelevantdocumentsduringthebiddingbutalso
failedtoshow"communityofinterest"amongitsconstituentcorporationsasrequiredinInformationTechnology
FoundationofthePhilippinesv.COMELEC(Infotech).6
In their Comments, respondents COMELEC and the Provider raised the following threshold contentions: (1)
petitionersneitherhavelegalinterestnorlocusstanditoquestionthevalidityoftheContractasnoneofthemwas

party to the Contract and the petition does not raise constitutional issues (2) the controversy is not ripe for
adjudication as the 2010 elections have not taken place (3) petitioners failed to exhaust administrative
remedies7(4)petitionersfailedtoobservethehierarchyofcourtsbynotseekingpriorrecoursefromlowercourts
of concurrent jurisdiction and (5) neither the writ of mandamus nor the writ of certiorari lies because the
documentspetitionerswishtocompelproductionareavailabletothepublicandtheCOMELECsexecutionofthe
Contractdoesnotinvolvetheexerciseofitsquasijudicialpowers.
Onthemerits,respondentsdefendthevalidityoftheContractonthefollowinggrounds:(1)therequirementfor
the limited use of an automated election system was intended for the 14 May 2007 elections, the national and
local elections "held immediately after effectivity" of RA 9369 on 10 February 2007 (2) compliance with the
requirementoflimitedautomationinthe2007electionsisnotaconditionprecedentfordeployingtheautomated
system nationwide in the 2010 elections following the mandate of Section 5, as amended, that "In succeeding
regularnationalorlocalelections,theAESshallbeimplementednationwide"(3)compliancewithSection5,as
amended,ismerelydirectoryconsideringSection12ofRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369,whichprovidesthat
"WithrespecttotheMay10,2010electionandsucceedingelectoralexercises,thesystemprocuredmusthave
demonstratedcapabilityandbeensuccessfullyusedinapriorelectoralexercisehereorabroad.Participationin
the2007pilotexerciseshallnotbeconclusiveofthesystem'sfitness."and(4)RepublicActNo.9525(RA9525),
enacted on 23 March 2009, allocating the budget for "an automated election system" in the 10 May 2010
electionsrepresentsthemostrecentexpressionoflegislativeintentonthesubject.
Belying petitioners' allegation that the optical scanners failed to meet minimum systems capabilities under RA
9369,respondentsinvokedtheresultsofthepreprocurementdemonstrationofthesystembeforetheCOMELEC
and other government officials on four occasions with the tested scanners showing 100% reading accuracy,
surpassingCOMELECs99.995%standard.8
Lastly,respondentscontendedthattheProvidernotonlycompliedwiththebiddingdocumentationrequirements
but also met the "community of interest" standard in Infotech for joint ventures. On disclosing the terms of its
subcontracts,theProvidermaintainedthattheContractdoesnotrequirethemtodoso.
We granted intervention to the Philippine Senate, which filed a CommentinIntervention, joining causes with
respondents,andtoAtty.PeteQuadra,whofiledaPetitioninIntervention,assailingthelackofcrediblesystems
auditundertheContract.Wealsorequestedthreeamicicuriaetocommentonthepetition.9
Weheardthepartiesandanamicuscuriae10inoralargumentson29July2009.
IntheirMemoranda,respondentscalledtheCourt'sattentiontoSenateResolutionNos.96and567,passedafter
the 11 August 2008 automated elections in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM), urging the
COMELECtoprepareforthe"fullautomation"ofthe10May2010elections.RespondentsTIMandSmartmatic
alsoraisedanewalternativeargumentthatthe2008ARMMelectionsconstitute"substantialcompliance"withthe
initiallimiteduseofanautomatedsystemunderSection5ofRA8436,asamended.11
OntheThresholdIssues
Thethresholdissuesrespondentsraiseonpetitionerslackoflocusstandiandnonexhaustionofadministrative
remediesweresimilarlyraisedandfoundsurmountableinInfotech.There,ashere,theindividualpetitionerswere
citizens and taxpayers who sought immediate recourse from this Court in a petition for certiorari to annul the
awardofthecontracttouseanautomatedelectionsysteminthe2004elections.TheCourtinInfotechfoundthe
petitioners status as taxpayers sufficient to give them personality to file the suit since the contract involved the
disbursement of public funds.12 The underlying important public interest involved in the contract in Infotech, as
here,ofensuringthe"conductoffree,orderly,clean,honestandcredibleelections"13alsosufficestovestlegal
standingtopetitionersascitizens.
DirectresorttothisCourtwasnotdeemedfataltothecauseofthepetitionersinInfotechforfactspeculiartothat
case14andbecausethenatureofthepetitionallowsfortheapplicationofsomeexceptionstotheruleonprior
resort to administrative remedies, namely, the unreasonability of insisting on compliance with the rule, resort to
thisCourtistheplain,speedyandadequateremedy,andthereisurgentneedforjudicialintervention.15 These
exceptionsequallyapplyhereanddoublyserveasgroundstorejecttheCOMELECsobjectiononprematurityof
thissuit.Indeed,waitinguntilaftertheContracthasbeenimplemented,aswhattheCOMELECwantspetitioners
todo,isasurewaytomootanychallengestoitsvalidity.
Norcantheruleofmandatingobservanceofhierarchyofcourtsbarresolutionofthissuitonthemerits.Justas
wefounditpropertoreviewthecontractinInfotech,weshoulddosonowforthesamereasonsthatwewaived
compliancewiththeruleonexhaustingremediesbeforetheCOMELEC.
OntheValidityoftheContract

TheUseofanAutomatedElectionSystemNationwide
UndertheContractViolatesSection5ofRA8436,
asAmended
Section5ofRA8436,as
Amended,ImposesaMandatory
TwotieredUseofanAutomated
ElectionSystem
Contrary to the COMELECs view that Section 5,16 as amended, "merely envisions" an initial limited use of an
automatedsysteminthe2007elections,17 both the text of the law and the intent behind its enactment show a
legislative design to use an automated system following a staggered, dualphased implementation scheme: the
firstphasecallsfortheuseofanautomatedsystemonapartialorlimitedscaleinvolvingselected,voterdense
areasineachofourthreemajorislandgroupingswhilethesecondphasecallsforthefulluseofanautomated
system nationwide. Textually, this is made mandatory by the uniform use of the word "shall" when Section 5
mandated that "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" (phase one) and "In succeeding regular national or
local elections, the AES shall be implemented nationwide" (phase 2). The word "shall" operates to impose a
duty.18
ThesponsorshipspeechinterpellationandfloordeliberationsonSenateBill2231,theprecursorSection6ofRA
9369(amendingandrenumberingSection6ofRA8436),confirmthelegislativeintenttoadoptadualphased
schemeofimplementation,thus:
[InterpellationbySenatorAquilinoPimentel,Jr.ontheSponsorshipSpeechofSenatorRichardGordon]:
SenatorGordon.[],itisimportantthatweshowthatinourproposalheretoday,whichIamsurepracticallyevery
memberoftheSenatewillhelpmecraftbetterlegislation,intheinterpellationsandontheamendments,itismy
hopethatwecouldproceedwiththis.Weimposeanabsoluteminimumof2citiesand2provinces,sothatifwe
candosowith10citiesof10provinces,sobeit,Mr.President.
SenatorPimentel.Thegentlemanistryingtopilotthe....
SenatorGordon.Yes,Mr.President,Thatisright.Wewanttopilotthissothatby2010,weshouldbereadytogo
all out. That is why it is important that we take the first steps. We can even pilot this in all the highly urbanized
citiesoroneremoteprovince,likesomewhereinMindanao,eveninTawiTawior,forthatmatter,justtoprovethe
pointthatitcanhappen.
ItisuptoushereintheSenatenowtosay,ifwewanttoinculcateortoputintherethenumberofcitiesorthe
number of provinces that are committed, this shall be part of it. That is why we leave that openended, Mr.
President.
xxxx
Senator Pimentel. Mr. President, the comments of the gentleman really demonstrate that there are practical
suggestionsthatheisespousing,especiallyonthematterofstartingtocovernottheentirecountryimmediately
inonefellblowbutgradually.Thereismerittothatproposal.19(Emphasissupplied)
xxxx
[InterpellationbySenatorLuisaP.EstradaofSenatorGordonduringSecondReading]:
SenatorEstrada(L).Willthegentlemanagreewithmethatthebestwaytoremovedoubtastotheintegrityofthe
systemistoconductthemockelectionsatleastthreedayspriortotheactualelections?
SenatorGordon.Actually,Mr.President,wecoulddothat,yes,butweprovidedthreemonthsfortheconductof
the mock elections so that we have enough time to correct the kinks, if there are any. And we would need that
time, after which the whole thing is secured and the only time the system gets started is in the morning of the
elections, just like the previous elections when the ballot box is opened and the machine codes are
simultaneouslytriggered.
Senator Estrada (L). Mr. President, I think, that is a long time. Three months is a long time to conduct mock
electionsbeforetheactualelections.
SenatorGordon.Thatiswhy,Mr.President,intheinitialphaseofthisexercise,fortheyear2007,theabsolute

minimumistwocitiesandtwoprovincessowecanreallycontrolthescenario.
Now, when we see that this had worked in a controlled scenario, perhaps, I hope that we can do all the major
cities of the country, all the highly urbanized cities in the country, because I guess that this is just an absolute
minimum.But,certainly,whenthemainelectionscomein2010,Iamsuretechnologywillbeadvancingsowell
that we could actually take the kinks out of the system, protect it and make sure that we can even do a mock
electionmaybeevencloserthantheaforesaidthreemonths.20(Emphasissupplied)
The framework of using an automated election system in a staggered, dualphased manner in RA 9369 is not
novel.ThesamelegislativeschemewasadoptedbyCongressinRA8436,althoughthecontrolledvariableinthe
firstphaseofRA8436wasnotthescopeoftheelectoralareabutthepositionsincludedintheautomatedtallying.
Thus, instead of limiting the use of an automation system in highly urbanized areas and provinces in the first
phase,RA8436mandatedtheuseofanautomatedsysteminthe11May1998electionstocanvassthevotes
cast "only for the positions of president, vicepresident, senators, and parties, organizations or coalitions
participatingunderthepartylistsystem."21
One need not search far and wide to see the wisdom, logic and practicality for this legislative insistence on
transformingourelectoralprocessesfrommanualtoautomatedgraduallyinphases.AsSenatorGordonputsit,
the ultimate goal is to "take the kinks out of the system" before deploying it full scale. Indeed, in systems
implementation,apilotrunoraparallelrunbeforefullturnovertothenewsystemisanorm.22 Thus, even as
CongressgavetheCOMELECdiscretioninchoosingtheappropriatetechnology,Congressinsistedonaphased
implementation involving local government units from each of our three major island groupings cognizant as it
was of the difficulties inherent in automating elections in an archipelago as dispersed as ours, with an average
nationwidetelecommunicationscoverageofnotmorethan75%.
NorcanitbesaidthatcompliancewiththerequirementinRA9369forpreelectionfieldtestandmockelection,23
stipulated in the Contract,24 serves the same purpose as the initial staggered or partial implementation of the
automated system. Congress treated both mechanisms differently by separately providing for partial
implementation in Section 5, as amended, and for a field test and mock election report by the Technical
EvaluationCommitteeinSection11.25Indeed,fieldtestsandmockelectionscanneverreplicateactualconditions
onelectionday.26
Forthesamereason,respondentsrelianceontheresultsofthepreprocurementdemonstrationofthesystem
hardly suffices to prove its reliability, much less functionality, in actual election conditions. The following
observationsonthelaboratorytestsbyamicusInformationTechnologyFoundationofthePhilippines(ITFP),are
enlightening:
The demonstration of PCOS only showed that the machine can scan accurately. Just like any computerized
system,designinganAutomatedElectionSystem(AES)shouldnotonlyconsiderhardwarethatworks.Itshould
also ensure that all the other elements of an automated system such as the communication and transmission
devicesandnetworks,theservers,theendtoendsoftwaresystem,the"peopleware"(projectmanagers,system
designers,development,maintenancepersonnel,operators,trainers,etc.),andtheusers(voters)meshtogether
smoothly.Thescanningcapabilityofthehardwarehasbeendemonstrated.Theotherequallyimportantelements
havenot.Itistheseotherelementsthatshouldnowbeconsideredandfocusedonandbetheconcentrationof
the pilot run. The framers of the law (RA 9369), who were assisted by a Technical Working Group (TWG),
appreciate[d]thecomplexitiesofanautomatedelectionsystemandforthatreasonincludedtherequirementofa
pilotrun.27(Emphasissupplied)
TheCOMELEC,dangerouslyparrotingthelineofthepartywhichstandstoprofitfromtheContract,justifiesnon
compliancewiththepartialautomationmandatedinSection5,asamended,bytreatingsuchpartialautomation
aslimitedtothe2007elections.Continuingwiththeirlineofreasoningandthus,ignoringthecompellingreason
behindsuchpartialautomation,respondentsconcludethatifSection5,asamended,isinterpretedasrequiring
aninitialpartialuseoftheautomatedsystembeforeitsfulldeploymentnationwide,then"Philippineelectionswill
neverbeautomated."28
Itmaybethat,Section5,asamended,needsstatutoryinterpretationwhetherapartialautomationisacondition
precedent to a full national automation. Section 5, as amended, provides that: (1) "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" and the elections of 14 May
2007wasthefirstregularnationalandlocalelectionafterRA9369tookeffecton10February2007,and(2)"In
succeeding regular national or local elections, the AES shall be implemented nationwide" and the 10 May 2010
electionsisthe"regularnationalorlocalelections"succeedingtheelectionsof14May2007.
The office of statutory interpretation has never been to privilege the letter of the law over its spirit. On the
contrary,ithasbeenandalwayswillbetheotherwayaroundtobreathelifetothelegislativeintenteventothe

extentofignoringthetext.29Thisisbecauseuseoflanguage,whileamarkofcivilization,30remainssusceptible
toerrorastheCourtknowsalltoowellafterhavingreviewedinthepastimpreciselydraftedlegislation.31
To give effect to the legislative intent behind Section 5, as amended, the automated election system under the
Contract should be limited to partial automation only, covering at least two highly urbanized cities and two
provinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao,tobechosenbytheCOMELEC.Afterwards,withtheCOMELEC
having tested its capabilities and manpower and after learning all the valuable lessons from the initial exercise,
theautomatedsystemtheCOMELECselectsforthesucceedingelectionsof12May2013canbefullydeployed
nationwide.
ProcurementStandardsUnderSection12,
asAmended,MeanttoAssureEfficiencyof
SystemandProofofSystemProvider's
Capability,SupplementingMinimum
StandardsUnderSection6,asAmended
Section1232ofRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369,whichinvolvestheprocurementofequipmentandmaterials
for automation, provides another layer of standard of system and system's provider capability for the 10 May
2010elections,namely:(1)prioruse,hereorabroad,ofthesystemand(2)proofbythesystemproviderofits
system'sfitness,regardlessofits"[p]articipationinthe2007pilotexercise."33Thesearemandatoryrequirements
which any provider bidding to automate the 10 May 2010 elections must show the COMELEC before the
COMELECcanprocuretheofferedgoodsandservices.
Thephrase"[p]articipationinthe2007pilotexercise"appearsinSection12ofRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369,
under the subheading "Procurement of Equipment and Materials." The phrase refers to the participation of a
bidder in the 2007 elections, which participation is not conclusive that the bidder's system of equipment and
materialsisfitandsuitableforthe2010nationwideelectoralexercise.Thisphrasedoesnotmeanthatthepilotor
partial automation in Section 5, as amended, can be dispensed with prior to a nationwide automated electoral
exercise. The requirement of a pilot or partial automation in Section 5, as amended, is a totally different
requirementfromtherequirementoffitnessofabidder'ssystemintheprocurementofequipmentandmaterials
underSection12,asamended.
Consequently, Section 12, as amended, is no authority to support respondents proposition that the phased
automationmandatedunderSection5,asamended,maybedispensedwith.Indeed,Section12hasnothingto
do with the issue. Section 5 and Section 12, as amended, are separate mechanisms of the law, governing
different aspects of the automation project, but commonly intended to ensure the conduct of secure, accurate,
andreliableautomatedelections.
RA9525Fundingthe10May2010
ElectionsdidnotRepealSection5ofRA8436,asamended
NeitherthetextnorpurposeofRA9525supportsrespondentssubmissionthatRA9525hasrepealedSection5
ofRA8436,asamended.Onthecontrary,theprovisoinSection2ofRA9525statesthat"thedisbursementof
the amounts herein appropriated or any part thereof shall be authorized only in strict compliance with the
Constitution[and]theprovisionsofRepublicActNo.9369xxx."Thus,theCOMELECisauthorizedtospendthe
appropriatedamountonlyinstrictcompliancewithRA9369,whichmandatesapartialautomation.Thestatement
in Section 2 that "such measures that will guaranty transparency and accuracy in the selection of the relevant
technology of the machines to be used in the May 10, 2010 automated national and local election" shall be
adoptedshouldbereadwiththerestofSection2.Atanyrate,RA9525fundstheimplementationofRA8436,as
amendedbyRA9369.Animplementingstatutecannotrepealwhatitintendstoenforce.
TheARMMElectionsin2008didnotMeettheParametersof
aLimitedInitialUseoftheAESinRA8436,asAmended
The parameters for the initial limited use of an automated election system under Section 5 of RA 8436, as
amended,are(1)theAESisusedinatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinceseachinLuzon,Visayas
andMindanao,(2)asselectedbytheCOMELEC.Theautomatedelections34 in the ARMM held last 11 August
2008 did not satisfy these parameters because (1) they were held in southern Mindanao only, involving six
provincesandtwocities,35(2)asmandatedbylaw.36
In practical terms, this means that the COMELEC, in the 2008 ARMM elections, did not use the trilevel
transmissionofelectionresultsfromvoterdenseareasfromnorthtosouthofthearchipelago,thetransmission
scheme to be used in the 10 May 2010 elections. This fact and the comparatively narrow scope of the 2008
ARMM elections in terms of voter population (1.6M in the 2008 ARMM elections as against 40M in the 10 May
2009elections),numberofmachinesprovidedbySmartmatic(2,558DREmachinesinthe2008ARMMelections
asagainst82,200precinctbasedscannersinthe10May2009elections),andpositionsinvolved(26inthe2008

ARMMelectionsasagainstroughly300inthe10May2010elections),37putintoseriousdoubtthevalidityofthe
Providersclaimthatthe2008ARMMelectionsconstitute"substantialcompliance"withthemandateforaninitial
limited use of the automated system under Section 5 of RA 8436, as amended. On the other hand, the initial
implementation under Section 5, as amended, because of its dispersed geographic scope, puts to use all the
system'scomponents.
ThePositionoftheSenate,While
EntitledtoRespectfulConsideration,
isnotControlling
TheSenate'spositionthattheCOMELECisauthorizedtouseanautomatedelectionsystemnationwideinthe10
May2010elections,asreflectedinitsResolutionNos.96and567,representsitscontemporaneousinterpretation
of Section 5 of RA 8436, as amended. As the upper half of our legislature, the Senate is certainly entitled to
construelegislation.Bytraditionandforcomity,thisbranchofthegovernmenthasalwaysaccordedinterpretive
attemptsbytheotherbrancheswithrespectfulconsideration.38Butitistimelytoreiteratethatinthedistributionof
powersordainedintheConstitution,thefinalwordonwhatthelawislieswiththisbranch.39
TheStipulationsintheContractRelinquishing
toSmartmaticControlofthe"TechnicalAspects"
oftheAutomatedElectionSystemViolatesSection26ofRA8436
Implementing the mandate in the Constitution for the COMELEC to "[e]nforce and administer all laws and
regulationsrelativetotheconductofanelection,"40Section26ofRA8426placestheautomatedelectionsystem
undertheCOMELECs"exclusivecontrolandsupervision,"thus:
Supervision and control. The System shall be under the exclusive supervision and control of the Commission.
Forthispurpose,thereisherebycreatedaninformationtechnologydepartmentintheCommissiontocarryout
thefulladministrationandimplementationoftheSystem.
The Commission shall take immediate steps as may be necessary forthe , installation, administration, storage,
and maintenance of equipment and devices, and to promulgate the necessary rules and regulations for the
effectiveimplementationofthisAct.(Italicizationintheoriginalboldfacingsupplied)
This power of "exclusive control and supervision" covers the adoption of measures for the "installation,
administration,[and]storage"ofthesystems"equipmentanddevices."
Juxtaposed with these constitutional and statutory parameters is the sweeping stipulation in the Contract that
"Smartmatic x x x shall be in charge of the technical aspects of the counting and canvassing software and
hardware,includingtransmissionconfigurationandsystemintegration."41TheextentofSmartmatic'scontrolover
theContract's"technicalaspects"isdivulgedintheContract'ssupportingdocumentswhichvestontheProvider
theresponsibilityto:
(1)generateanddistributetheaccesskeysforthecanvassingequipmentand82,200opticalscannersto
beusedonelectionday42
(2)deliverthe82,200opticalscannerstotheirdesignatedprecinctsandsecurethemonsite43
(3) prepare the polling places and canvassing centers in all levels (that is, municipal, provincial and
national)tomakethem"fullyfunctional"44and
(4) maintain 100% electronic transmission capability on election day (and thus fill the 25% gap of the
countryscurrent75%networkcoverage).45
Items (1) and (3) are unmistakably repugnant to Section 26 of RA 8426. Whoever controls the access keys
controls the elections. Control of the access keys means the capacity to instantaneously change the election
resultsinanyprecinctinthecountry.GivingtotheProvidertheaccesskeysboththeprivateandpublicaccess
keysislikegivingtothesystemadministratorofYahooorHotmailone'sprivatepasswordtohisorheremail
account.TheprivatekeyissupposedtobeprivatetotheChairoftheBoardofElectionInspectors,generatedby
himandunknowntotheProvider.Otherwise,theProviderwillhavethecapacitytoaltertheelectionresultsatthe
precinctlevel.Worse,eventheprivatekeysatthecanvassinglevelaregeneratedbytheProvider,allowingthe
Providertochangetheelectionresultsatthecanvassinglevel.Clearly,theCOMELEChasabdicatedcontrolover
theelectionstotheProvider,puttingtheintegrityandoutcomeofthe10May2010electionssolelyinthehandsof
theProvider.Moreover,thepollingplacesandcanvassingcenters,whicharethecriticaloperationalareasduring
theelections,mustbeunderthefullcontroloftheCOMELEC.

WhatSection26confinestotheCOMELEC'sexclusivecontrolandsupervision,theCOMELECintheContract
relinquishestoSmartmatic.BydesignatingSmartmaticastheentityinchargeofthecrucialtechnicalaspects
of the automated systems operation equipment security and installation and results canvassing and
transmission the COMELEC contented itself with taking charge over the system's nontechnical, that is,
manualaspects.However,RA8436doesnotbifurcatecontrolandsupervisionalongtechnicalandnontechnical
lines. On the contrary, Section 26 treated the entire automated system wholistically by mandating that [t]he
SystemshallbeundertheexclusivesupervisionandcontroloftheCommission.Section26requiresnolessthan
complete and exclusive control and supervision by the COMELEC over the automated system. The regime of
partial,nonexclusiveCOMELECcontrolovertheautomatedsystemundertheContractfallsshortofSection26's
stringentstandard.
AvitalpolicyconsiderationliesbehindtheblanketmandateofSection26.Underourconstitutionalscheme,the
COMELECisthestateorgantaskedto[e]nforceandadministeralllawsandregulationsrelativetotheconductof
anelection46andof"ensuringxxxcredibleelections."47 By exercising exclusive control and supervision over
theautomatedsystem,theCOMELECcanharnessitsmanpowerandresourcestoefficientlypreventorcorrect
fraud. By surrendering to Smartmatic control over the automated system's "technical aspects," the COMELEC
closedthedooronmanualfraudbutopenedwidethewindowtoitsautomatedcounterpart.Ashighlightedinthe
findingsofarecentindependentstudy,thethreatofinternalhackingisalltooreal:
Thegreaterthreattomostsystemscomesnotfromexternalhackers,butfrominsiderswhohavedirectaccessto
themachines.Softwarecanbemodifiedmaliciouslybeforebeinginstalledintoindividualvotingmachines.There
isnoreasontotrustinsidersintheelectionindustryanymorethaninotherindustries,suchasgambling,where
sophisticatedinsiderfraudhasoccurreddespiteextraordinarymeasurestopreventit.48xxxx
Respondentsglossovertheimportoftheoffendingcontractualstipulations,callingattentiontotherequestforbid
proposals which gave notice that the COMELEC was accepting bids from "a complete solutions provider x x x
which can provide x x x overall nationwide project management service and total customer support under
COMELECsupervisionandcontrol."49TheProvideralsolimitstheapplicationofthesecondparagraphofArticle
3.3betweenTIMandSmartmatic.50
A close reading of the RFP shows that the provision by the Provider of "project management service and total
customersupport"(paragraph6,PartII)overwhichtheCOMELECwillhavesupervisionandcontrol,corresponds
only to Component 3 of the Contract, that is, overall project management. The RFP does not say that the
COMELECexercisessupervisionandcontrolovertheContract'sremainingtwocomponents,namely,thepaper
based automatedelection system (Component 1) and the the provision for electronic transmission using public
telecommunicationsnetworks(Component2).51
On the Provider's contention that the second paragraph of Article 3.3 regulates the relations between TIM and
Smartmatic,sufficeittosaythattheargumentwouldcarryweightifthestipulationwasplacedinthejointventure
agreement. The provision in question was placed in the Contract precisely to hold the Provider "liable for all its
obligationsunderthisProject,"asthefirstsentenceofArticle3.3provides.
UntiltheCOMELECandtheProvideramendtheoffendingstipulations,thesestipulationsgoverntherightsand
obligationsbetweenthem.
TheContractProvidesfor
theEffectsofPartialAnnulment
Unlike the disposition in Infotech, a finding that the Contract violates Section 5 and Section 26 of RA 8436, as
amended,resultsonlyinitspartialinvalidationundertheContractsSeverabilityclause.52ThisleavesCOMELEC
free to renegotiate with the Provider to scale down scope of the Contract, adjust the contract price, and modify
otherpertinentstipulations.
UsingtheAutomatedSystemNationwideinthe10May2010Elections
PlacesourFragileDemocracyatNeedlessRisk
The COMELECs lack of experience in nationwide automation, its nonfamiliarity with its chosen technology, the
gaps in security features of the system, the scale of its operation, Smartmatic's control over the automation
aspects of the system, and the not more than 75% network coverage currently available in this archipelago of
morethan7,000islandsallcombinetocreateagapingblackholeofunknownriskswhichcancrashtheuntested
system come 10 May 2010. Undoubtedly, no automated election system is perfect.53 But we also cannot take
chanceswithourfragiledemocracy.Afterall,whatthesemachinescountarenotthedaysearningsofageneral
merchandisestore.Theytabulatetherawestexpressionofthesovereignwillofeveryvoterinthispolity.Thisis
whyCongresssawfittousetechnologysbenefitsgingerly.
Lostintheheadlongrushtoswitchthiscountryselectoralsystemfromfullymanualtofullyautomatedovernight

isthesoberingthoughtthatif,foranyreasonrelatingtotheimplementationoftheContract,thereisafailureof
elections and no President and VicePresident are proclaimed, and no Senate President and Speaker of the
Housearechosen,bynoonof30June2010,apowervacuumiscertaintoemerge.54Thisisthesurestwayto
defeatthepurposeoftheentireelectoralexercise,andputatunnecessaryriskourhardearneddemocracy.
Accordingly, I vote to GRANT IN PART the petition by annulling the provisions of the Contract relating to the
nationwide use of automated election system, and instead to DIRECT the COMELEC (1) to implement a partial
automationofthe10May2010electionsasprovidedinSection5ofRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369(2)to
assumefullandexclusivecontroloftheaccesskeystothepartialautomationsystemand(3)toassumecontrol
overpreparationofthepollingplacesandcanvassingcentersinalllevelstomakethemfullyfunctional.
ANTONIOT.CARPIO
AssociateJustice

Footnotes
1ContractfortheProvisionofAnAutomatedElectionSystemfortheMay10,2010SynchronizedNational

and Local Elections ("Contract"). The affected provisions of the Contract are Article 3 (Scope of the
Project),Article4(ContractFeeandPayment),relevantsubprovisionsofArticle5(Responsibilitiesofthe
Provider), relevant subprovisions of Article 6 (COMELECs responsibilities), and relevant subprovisions
Article7(DeliveryandAcceptance).TheaffectedportionsoftheRequestforProposal(madeintegraltothe
Contract under Article 21) are Component 1B (Precinct Count Optical Scan), Component 1C
(Counting/Consolidation System), Component 2 (Provision for Electronic Transmission Using Public
Telecommunication Networks) and Component 3 (Overall Project Management). Under the Contracts
Severability Clause (Article 20), the unaffected provisions remain valid and the parties may opt to
renegotiatetheinvalidatedprovisions.
2AnActAuthorizingTheCommissionOnElectionsToUseAnAutomatedElectionSystemInTheMay11,

1998 National Or Local Elections And In Subsequent National And Local Electoral Exercises, Providing
FundsThereforAndForOtherPurposes.
3 The Contract, divided into three components (paperbased automatedelection system [Component 1],

provisionforelectronictransmissionusingpublictelecommunicationsnetworks[Component2],andoverall
projectmanagement[Component3]),requirestheProviderto,amongothers:
(1)Developadatamanagementsystem(ElectionManagementSystem),capableofgeneratingaudit
log and integrating with the COMELECs database to create preelection configuration data (i.e.,
voting jurisdictions, number of voters per precinct, positions and seats for election, candidates
information and title and date of elections), generate ballot faces, and configure relevant data for
differenttypesofelections(e.g.nationalandlocalelections,ARMMelections,plebiscites,initiatives,
recall elections, and special elections). The Provider is required to secure the system with
authorization and authentication requirements (Component IA). (Contract, p. 1 Request For
Proposal[RFP],pp.1415)
(2) Configure each of the 82,200 precinct optical scanners (80,136 allocated units plus 2,064
contingency units) for use in the city/municipality/councilor district where each scanner will be
deployedonelectiondaytoscan"ballotsintendedforthecity/municipality/councilordistrictforwhich
ithasbeenconfigured."TheProvidersobligationsonthesecurityfeaturesforthescanningofballots
at,andtransmissionofelectionresultsfrom,eachofthe80,000clusteredprecinctsof1,000voters
percluster,areasfollows:(a)togenerateaccesskeys(suchasusernamesandpasswords)withat
least two access levels (operator and administrator) (b) to program each scanner to require "the
electronic authentication and certification of the election results x x x by at least two [Board of
Election Inspector] (BEI) members" before transmission of the results, in encrypted form, from the
precinctlevel(tothemunicipalboardofcanvassers,theCOMELECcentralserver,andtheserverfor
the political parties, accredited citizens arm and the Kapisanan ng mga Brodkaster ng Pilipinas)
using "wireless, wired or satellitebased connection or a combination thereof" ensuring that the
transmission service must be "available 99% of the time" and (c) to program each scanner "to
generateabackupcopyofthedigitallysignedandencryptedERinaremovabledatastoragedevice"
(ComponentIB).(Contract,p.1RFP,pp.1516BidBulletinNo.4,27April2009,p.5BidBulletin
No.6,27April2009,pp.1,7)
(3) Develop a consolidation and canvassing system which will tally election results for municipal,
provincial and national offices using transmitted data (i.e. for municipal canvassing, using precinct
results for provincial/district canvassing, using consolidated city/municipal results for COMELEC

canvassing[forsenatorialandpartylistelections],usingconsolidatedprovincial/cityresultsandfor
canvassing by Congress [for Presidential and VicePresidential elections], using consolidated
provincial/cityresults).Tosecurethesystem,thecontractrequirestheProviderto:(a)programthe
consolidation and canvassing system to "monitor, detect, [and] record x x x intrusion and/or
unauthorized access and recognize its authorized users with the use of physical security devices,
suchasUSBflashdrivesorPMCIAcards,withdigitalcertificates,asidefromtheuseofuserIDsand
passwords"(b)programthesystemto"decryptandauthenticatethetransmittedencryptedelection
results prior to consolidation/canvassing" and (c) to program the system to allow the Board of
Canvassers (BOC) "to digitally sign all electronic results and reports before transmission."
(ComponentIC).(Contract,pp.1,6RFP,p.18)
(4)Provideoverallprojectmanagementservicesandstaffing(Component3)(RFP,pp.2327)
(5) Train COMELEC executives (83 to 100), technical personnel (100), field personnel (4,000) and
BEI members (160,272) on the systems operations. For the COMELEC technical staff, the training
shouldenablethemto"operatethesystemsontheirown."(RFP,p.31BidBulletinNo.20,27April
2009,pp.12)and
(6) Provide, one week before and after the elections, at least "one technician for every
voting/countinganddatatransmissioncenters,"who"musthavecellulartelephonesorothermeans
ofrealtimecommunication."(RFP,p.32).
4ForthewritsofCertiorari,ProhibitionandMandamus.
5 Jarltech International Corporation (supplier of optical scanners), Dominion Voting Systems (copyright

owner of the software for the optical scanners) and ToGo Corporation (hired by the Provider to distribute
theopticalscannerstotheirassignedprecincts).
6464Phil.173(2004).
7RespondentsTIMandSmartmaticinvokeSections55and58ofRepublicActNo.9184whichprovide:

Section 55. Protests on Decisions of the BAC. Decisions of the BAC in all stages of procurement
may be protested to the head of the procuring entity and shall be in writing. Decisions of the BAC
may be protested by filing a verified position paper and paying a nonrefundable protest fee. The
amountoftheprotestfeeandtheperiodsduringwhichtheprotestsmaybefiledandresolvedshall
bespecifiedintheIRR.
Section 58. Report to Regular Courts Certiorari. Court action may be resorted to only after the
protests contemplated in this Article shall have been completed. Cases that are filed in violation of
theprocessspecifiedinthisArticleshallbedismissedforlackofjurisdiction.Theregionaltrialcourt
shall have jurisdiction over final decision of the head of the procuring entity. Court actions shall be
governedbyRule65ofthe1997RulesofCivilProcedure.
ThisprovisioniswithoutprejudicetoanylawconferringontheSupremecourtthesolejurisdictionto
issuetemporaryrestrainingordersandinjunctionsrelatingtoInfrastructureProjectsofGovernment.
8 The first test used 625 ballots each with 32 "predetermined" marks while the second test used 650

ballotseachsimilarlybearing32marks(COMELECComment,pp.3031).
9 The University of the Philippines Computer Center, National Computer Center, and Information

TechnologyFoundation.
10InformationTechnologyFoundationofthePhilippines.
11Memorandum(TIMandSmartmatic),pp.5463.
12Supranote6.
13Section2(4)andSection4,ArticleIX(C),Constitution.
14TheCOMELECawardedthecontracttoabidderevenbeforetheBidsandAwardsCommitteesubmitted

itsReportonthebidding.
15 Supra 6at 163. It also appears that the protest mechanism provided in RA 9184, which respondents

invoke,appliestolosingbidders,nottothirdpartieslikepetitioners.Section55.2ofitsimplementingrules

requiresthe"bidder"toproviderelevantcontactinformationinitspositionpaper.
16 Section 5, as amended, reads in its entirety: "SEC. 6. Section 6 of Republic Act No. 8436 is hereby

amendedtoreadasfollows:
SEC. 5 Authority to Use an Automated Election System. To carry out the abovestated policy, the
Commission on Elections, herein referred to as the Commission, is hereby authorized to use an
automated election system or systems in the same election in different provinces, whether paper
basedoradirectrecordingautomatedelectionsystemasitmaydeemappropriateandpracticalfor
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
immediatelyaftereffectivityofthisAct,theAESshallbeusedinatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcities
and two provinces each in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, to be chosen by the Commission:
Provided,further,Thatlocalgovernmentunitswhoseofficialshavebeenthesubjectofadministrative
chargeswithinsixteen(16)monthpriortotheMay14,2007electionshallnotbechosen:Provided,
finally,ThatnoareashallbechosenwithouttheconsentoftheSanggunianofthelocalgovernment
unit concerned. The term local government unit as used in this provision shall refer to a highly
urbanized city or province. In succeeding regular national or local elections, the AES shall be
implementednationwide."
17COMELECComment,p.23.
18Bersabalv.Salvador,173Phil.379(1978).
192RecordoftheSenate5051(20March2006).
20Id.at6768(28March2006).
21Section5ofRA8436readsinpertinentparts:

Section5.Authoritytouseanautomatedelectionsystem.Tocarryouttheabovestatedpolicy,the
Commission on Elections, herein referred to as the Commission, is hereby authorized to use an
automatedelectionsystem,hereinreferredtoastheSystem,fortheprocessofvoting,countingof
votesandcanvassing/consolidationofresultsofthenationalandlocalelections:Provided,however,
That for the May 11, 1998 elections, the System shall be applicable in all areas within the country
only for the positions of president, vicepresident, senators and parties, organizations or coalitions
participatingunderthepartylistsystem.
UnlikeinRA9369,CongressinSection5ofRA8436providedacontingencymechanism,thatis,for
theCOMELECtoreverttomanualsystemfor"theelectionsforbothnationalandlocalpositionsxxx
except in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM)," if "inspite of its diligent efforts to
implementthismandateintheexerciseofthisauthority,itbecomesevidentbyFebruary9,1998that
the Commission cannot fully implement the automated election system for national positions in the
May11,1998elections."
Significantly, the original draft for Section 5 in Senate Bill No. 3214, the precursor of RA 8436,
provided for the use of an automated system in "three regions" for the 11 May 1998 elections.
However, upon the advice of the COMELEC that it will not be able to comply with this scheme,
SenatorMiriamSantiago,thebillsprincipalauthor,amendedthedraftforthefirstphasetoinstead
cover "17 highlyurbanized cities." During the bill's Second Reading, Senator Marcelo Fernan
submitted a proposal to limit the first phase of automation to selected positions instead of selected
areas.TheSenateapprovedhisproposal(2RecordoftheSenate986987,989990[19November
1997]id.at149[1December1997]).
22TSNOralArguments(AugustoLagman),29July2009,pp.528529.
23Section11ofRA9369providesinpertinentparts:

SEC.11.FunctionsoftheTechnicalEvaluationCommittee.TheCommitteeshallcertify,throughan
established international certification entity to be chosen by the Commission from the
recommendations of the Advisory Council, not later than three months before the date of the
electoral exercises, categorically stating that the AES, including its hardware and software
components,isoperatingproperly,securely,andaccurately,inaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthis
Actbased,amongothers,onthefollowingdocumentedresults:
1.Thesuccessfulconductofafieldtestingprocessfollowedbyamockelectioneventinoneormore

cities/municipalities
24RFP,pp.3233.
25 The distinction was elucidated during the floor deliberations of Senate Bill 2231 when Senator Gordon

opposedtheamendmentofSenatorPimenteltosubstitutetheword"use"inSection5with"pilot,"thus:
SenatorPimentel.xxxxIproposethatinlieuoftheword"USED",wesubstitutethefollowingtwo
words PILOTTESTED IN AT LEAST TWO (2) HIGHLY URBANIZED CITIES AND TWO (2)
PROVINCES IN LUZON: AT LEAST TWO (2) HIGHLY URBANIZED CITIES AND TWO (2)
PROVINCESINTHEVISAYAS:ANDATLEASTTWO(2)HIGHLYURBANIZEDCITIESANDTWO(2)
PROVINCESINMINDANAOTOBEDETERMINEDBYTHECOMELEC.
SenatorGordon.Iaccepttheamendment,withouttheuseoftheword"PILOT".Iwouldinsistthatwe
use the word "USED" because it might be misconstrued. There is already a provision that there
would be a mock election in one province or one city in the bill down the line. Maybe we can go
aheadwiththeword"USED".(2RecordoftheSenate60[5April2006]capitalizationintheoriginal,
boldfacingsupplied).
26 Under the Contract, both the field test and mock election will use 10 optical scanners involving 17

canvassingunits(8city/municipality,6provincial,2nationaland1centralbackup)using3,000ballots(Bid
Bulletin No. 4, 27 April 2009, pp. 67). On 10 May 2010, 80,136 optical scanners will be used with 1,234
canvassingunitstallyingresultsfromapproximately40Mballots.
27ITFPComment,p.3.ITFPsobservationthatbasedonthelaboratorytestsresults,theopticalscanners

canscanaccuratelyisnotsharedbyanotherinformationtechnologyexpert,Prof.PabloManalastas,who
opinedthat"underactualelectionconditionswherepeoplemayusepencil,ballpen,rollingballjotter,and
felttippen,andusingallallowablemarkingstyles(dot,checkmark,crossmark,andcompleteshade),the
[optical scanners] will be lucky to achieve an accuracy of 50%." (see http://newsbreak.com.ph/index.php?
option=com_content&task=view&id=6589&Itemid=88889287[lastvisitedon14August2009]).
28 Memorandum (TIM and Smartmatic), p. 5. The COMELEC advanced the same view (Memorandum

[COMELEC]),pp.3637.
29CityofBaguiov.Marcos,136Phil.569(1969)Lopez&Sons,Inc.v.CourtofTaxAppeals,100Phil.850

(1957).ThesameruleappliesininterpretingtheConstitution(Taadav.Cuenco,103Phil.1051[1958]).
30 Philippine Constitutional Association v. Mathay, 124 Phil. 890, 922 (1966) Castro, J., concurring

(referringtolanguageas"oneofthedistinctivequalitiesxxxofmodernthinkingman.")
31 See City of Baguio v. Marcos, supra (involving a textual conflict between the title and Section 1 of

Republic Act No. 931 on the reckoning of the prescriptive period to reopen cadastral proceedings) and
Lopez&Sons,Inc.v.CourtofTaxAppeals,supranote29(involvingatextualconflictbetweenSection7
andSection11ofRepublicActNo.1125onthereviewjurisdictionoftheCourtofTaxAppeals).
32Theprovisionreadsinitsentirety:"SEC.10.Section8ofRepublicActNo.8436isherebyamendedto

readasfollow:
SEC.12. Procurement of Equipment and Materials. To achieve the purpose of this Act, the
Commission in authorized to procure, in accordance with existing laws, by purchase, lease, rent or
otherformsofacquisition,supplies,equipment,materials,software,facilities,andotherservice,from
localorforeignsourcesfreefromtaxesandimportduties,subjecttoaccountingandauditingrules
and regulation. With respect to the May 10, 2010 election and succeeding electoral exercises, the
systemprocuredmusthavedemonstratedcapabilityandbeensuccessfullyusedinapriorelectoral
exercise here or abroad. Participation in the 2007 pilot exercise shall not be conclusive of the
system'sfitness.
Indeterminingtheamountofanybidfromatechnology,softwareorequipmentsupplier,thecostto
the government of its deployment and implementation shall be added to the bid price as integral
thereto.Thevalueofanyalternativeusetowhichsuchtechnology,softwareorequipmentcanbeput
forpublicuseshallnotbedeductedfromtheoriginalfacevalueofthesaidbid.
33AspointedoutbyJusticeTeresitaJ.LeonardoDeCastrointheoralarguments(TSN,29July2009,pp.

499500).
34Usingopticalmarkreader(OMR)anddirectrecordingelectronic(DRE)technologies.

35ShariffKabunsuan,Maguindanao,LanaodelSur,Basilan,SuluandTawiTawiandthecitiesofMarawi

andLamitan.ShariffKabunsuanhassincerevertedtoitsmotherprovince,Maguindanao,undertheruling
inSemav.CommissiononElections(G.R.No.177597,16July2008,558SCRA700)voidingitscreation.
36RepublicActNo.9333.
37Governor,ViceGovernorand24legislators(membersoftheRegionalLegislativeAssembly).
38Yrav.Abao,52Phil.381(1928).
39InTaadav.Cuenco,103Phil.1051(1958),theCourtnotedbutdidnotfollowtheinterpretationofthe

SecretaryofJusticeofSection11,ArticleVIofthe1935Constitution.
40Section2(1),ArticleIX(C),Constitution.
41Article3.3whichprovidesinfull:

The PROVIDER shall be liable for all its obligations under this Project, and the performance of
portions thereof by other persons or entities not parties to this Contract shall not relieve the
PROVIDERofsaidobligationsandconcomitantliabilities.
SMARTMATIC,asthejointventurepartnerwiththegreatertrackrecordinautomatedelections,shall
be in charge of the technical aspects of the counting and canvassing software and hardware,
including transmission configuration and system integration. SMARTMATIC shall also be primarily
responsibleforpreventingandtroubleshootingtechnicalproblemsthatmayariseduringtheelection.
The PROVIDER must provide to SMARTMATIC at all times the support required to perform the
aboveresponsibilities.
42RFP,p.15BidBulletinNo.10,27April2009,p.2.Theimportanceofcontrollingtheaccesskeyswas

illustrated in the ARMM Regional elections in 2008 when Smartmatic, which the COMELEC contracted to
supply some of the equipment used, remotelyaccessed several tabulating machines to recalibrate their
softwareafterthemachines"zeroedout"theresultsduetoanerrorinloggingthenumberofcastballots.
(Manuel A. Alcuaz, Jr., Mapping the Future [Is the SmartmaticTIMCOMELEC Contract FrontLoaded?],
PhilippineDailyInquirer,20July2009,p.B22).CommentingonSmartmatic'scontrolovertheprivateand
publickeys(tobedistributedtotheBEIsand[BoardofCanvassers]personnel),anITexpertnoted:"Since
Smartmatichasthisresponsibility[ofgeneratingtheaccesskeys],itwillhavepossessionofallBEIs'private
keys, and will give Smartmatic the capability to change the [Election Results] of any precinct in the entire
country, resulting in massive computerized cheating in case this capability is exploited by Smartmatic."
(Professor Pablo Manalastas at http://pmana.multiply.com/journal/item/68/Harry_Roque_vs_COMELEC
Smartmatic[lastvisitedon25August2009]).
43BidBulletinNo.6,27April2009,p.7BidBulletinNo.10,27April2009,p.3.
44BidBulletinNo.19,27April2009,p.2.
45BidBulletinNo.6,27April2009,pp.12.
46Section2(1),ArticleIX(C),Constitution.
47SeeSection2(4)andSection4,ArticleIX(C)oftheConstitutionauthorizingtheCOMELECtodeputize

lawenforcementagenciesandregulatefranchises,respectively,toensure"free,orderly,honest,peaceful,
andcredibleelections."
48 Report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform (September 2005), p. 36, available at

http://www.american.edu/ia/cfer/report/full_report.pdf(lastvisitedon14August2009).
49RFP,p.5.
50Memorandum(TIMandSmartmatic),p.100.
51TherelevantportionoftheRFPprovides(p.5):

The Commission on Elections (COMELEC), through its Bids and Awards Committee (BAC), is

currentlyacceptingbidsforthelease,withanoptiontopurchase,ofanautomatedelectionsystem
(AES)thatwillmeetthefollowingneeds:
(1)IntroductionofanewsystemofvotingtotheFilipinoelectoratenationwidewithoutdeviatingmuch
fromthemanualmannerofvotingandwhichprotectsthevotersrighttothesecrecyofhisvote
(2) An automated system of counting of votes which can count the voters vote accurately and as
intendedbythevoter,whichcansecuretheprecinctresultsinsuchawaythatitcannotbetampered
with or read outside the system, and the results of which can be accepted as input by the existing
canvassingapplicationoftheCOMELEC
Anintegratedandcomprehensivesystemforpreparingandmanagingpreelectionconfigurationand
postelectionrequirements
(3) A secure, reliable and redundant service for electronic transmission of precinct results from
authorized sources to COMELECdesignated target destinations using public telecommunication
network,includingInternetaccessfromallcities,municipalitiesandprovinces
(4)Aconsolidation/canvassingsystemthatallowsconsolidationofprecinctresults,andcity/municipal
andprovincialresultsand
(5)Acompletesolutionsprovider,andnotjustavendor,whichcanprovideexperiencedandeffective
overall nationwide project management service and total customer support (covering all areas of
project implementation including technical support, training, information campaign support, civil and
electrical works service, warehousing, deployment, installation and pullout, contingency planning,
etc.),underCOMELECsupervisionandcontrol,toensureeffectiveandsuccessfulimplementationof
theProject.(Emphasissupplied)
WhenmatchedwiththeContract's"components,"paragraph3correspondstoComponent1(paper
basedautomatedelectionsystem)whileparagraphs4and5correspondtoComponent2(electronic
transmissionusingpublictelecommunicationsnetworks).
52Article20oftheContractprovides:"IfanyprovisionofthisContractisdeclaredillegal,unenforceableor

void, the parties shall negotiate in good faith to agree upon a substitute provision that is legal and
enforceableandconsistentwiththeintentionsoftheProject.Therestofthiscontractthatisnotmaterially
affected by such declaration shall remain valid, binding and enforceable." Under Article 1409 of the Civil
Code,contractswhosepurposeiscontrarytolawarevoid.
53 Indeed, even technologically advanced democracies such as the United States and some countries in

Europecontinuetoexperienceglitchesintheoperationoftheirelectronicvotingsystems.(SeeF.Emmert,
Trouble Counting Votes? Comparing Voting Mechanism in the United States and Selected Countries, 41
CreightonL.Rev.3[2007]).
54UnderSection7,ArticleVIIoftheConstitution,theVicePresident,SenatePresidentandSpeakerofthe

HousesucceedstotheOfficeofthePresidentincaseofvacancy,inthatorder.Congresshasyettopassa
lawproviding"forthemannerinwhichonewhoistoactasPresidentshallbeselecteduntilaPresidentora
VicePresidentshallhavequalified"asrequiredunderSection7.
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

SEPARATEOPINION
CORONA,J:
Anewcivilizationisemerginginourlives,andblindmeneverywherearetryingtosuppressit.Thisnewcivilization
brings with it new family styles changed ways of working, loving, and living a new economy new political
conflictsandbeyondallthis,analteredconsciousnessaswell.Piecesofthisnewcivilizationexisttoday.Millions
are already attuning their lives to the rhythms of tomorrow. Others, terrified of the future, are engaged in a
desperate,futileflightintothepastandaretryingtorestorethedyingworldthatgavethembirth.
Thedawnofthisnewcivilizationisthesinglemostexplosivefactofourlifetimes.1
The Third Wave of the Philippine electoral system is upon us. The ballot, one of the most significant means
through which the people directly participate in governance by periodically choosing their representatives, is

evolving from purely paperbased to computerreadable and the elections are progressing from manual to
automated. Indeed, the means by which popular sovereignty may be exercised through suffrage is about to
change considerably. The tsunami of change in our electoral system encourages us to adopt the words of the
renownedfuturistAlvinTofflerasourown:"Wearethechildrenofthenewtransformation,theThirdWave."
Backthen,therewasthepapeletaoficial.Itwasbarelythesizeofthispaperandonlyonesidewaswrittenwith
the titles of seven elective offices. On the space corresponding to each office, a voter wrote the name of the
chosencandidate.Thevoterwouldthendepositthepapeletainaballotboxand,attheclosingofthepolls,the
voteswouldbepubliclycountedandtallied,withacopyofthestatementoftheresultssentbyregisteredmailor
specialmessengertotheprovincialtreasurer.Ifheavencooperated,theelectionresultswereknownwithintwo
months.2
Throughtheyears,thepapeletaevolvedintotheofficialballot,commonlyknownasthebalota.Thebalotawasof
uniformsizeandprovidedbytheCommissiononElections(Comelec).Itwasprintedinblackinkonwhitesecurity
paperwithdistinctive,clearandlegiblewatermarksthatreadilydistinguisheditfromordinarypaper.Eachbalota
wasintheshapeofastripwithstubanddetachablecouponcontainingtheballotsserialnumberandaspacefor
thethumbmarkofthevoteronthedetachablecoupon.Itcontainedallthenamesofalltheofficestobevotedfor
in the election, allowing opposite the name of each office sufficient space or spaces with horizontal lines where
the voter wrote the name or names of individual candidates voted for by him. The voter, after affixing his
thumbmark on the detachable coupon in the presence of the board of election inspectors, deposited his balota
andthecouponintherespectivecompartmentsoftheballotbox.Assoonasthevotingwasfinished,theballots
werecountedpubliclyandthetotalsofvotesrecordedinthetallyboardandelectionreturns.Thereturnswere
thensubmittedtothevariousboardsofcanvassers(municipalorcity,provincialandnational)forcanvassing.The
electionresultswerehopefullyproclaimedwithinoneweek(forlocalpositions)oruptotwomonths(fornational
positions).
In the coming synchronized national and local elections in May 2010, it will be the precinct count optical scan
(PCOS)ballot.Itwillbenearlythricethesizeofthispaper,withbothsidesfilledwiththenamesofatleast600
candidatesandoppositeeachnamewillbeaspotwhichthevotercanmarktoindicatehischoice.Itwillbefed
manually into the PCOS which in turn will determine the ballots authenticity, tally the votes marked therein and
generate digitally signed and encrypted election results to be electronically transmitted to different levels for
consolidationandcanvass.3Hopefully,withintwodaystheelectionresultswillbeknown.
The shift from manual elections to an automated election system (AES) has indeed become inevitable. Not just
onebutfourlawshavebeenpasseddecreeingit:RA480465in1995,RA84366in1997,RA93697in2007and
RA95258in2009.
Forthe2010elections,automationisenvisagedinRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369.Pursuanttothatpurpose,
respondentCommissiononElectionsSpecialBidsandAwardsCommittee(ComelecSBAC)conductedbiddings
and issued to the joint venture of respondents Smartmatic International Corporation and Total Information
ManagementCorporation(SmartmaticTIM)anoticeofawardonJune10,2009.9OnJuly10,2009,respondent
Comelec and SmartmaticTIM executed a contract governing the procurement of counting machines, including
the supply of ballot paper, electronic transmission services using public telecommunications networks, training,
technical support, warehousing, deployment, installation, pullout, systems integration and overall project
management.10Onthesameday,SmartmaticTIMreceivedanoticetoproceedwiththeimplementationofthe
contract.11
Early on, however, petitioners as concerned citizens and taxpayers filed a petition in this Court for certiorari,
prohibition and mandamus urging us to annul the June 10, 2009 notice of award and permanently enjoin
respondentsfromsigningand/orimplementinganycontractforthe2010elections.Theyalsosoughttocompelall
respondents to disclose the full terms and conditions of the relevant agreements between and among
themselves,includingtheagreementsamongrespondentSmartmatic,DominionVotingSystems(Dominion)and
Jartltech International Corporation (Jarltech) and between respondent TIM and 2Go Corporation (2Go),
respectively.12However,withtheexecutionoftheJuly10,2009contractbetweenComelecandSmartmaticTIM,
petitionersarenowalsoseekingtheannulmentofthesaidcontract.13
Petitioners argue that the impugned June 10, 2009 notice of award and July 10, 2009 contract violate the
following:
(a)Sections5and12ofRA8436,asamendedbyRAs9329and9525onpilottestingandSection7ofRA
8436,asamendedbyRA9329,onthesystemscapabilityofthePCOSmachinesand14
(b) Section 8 of RA 704215 in relation to EO16 58417 and Article IX, Part B, Items 2.2.4, 2.2.6.1.2.2,
2.2.6.1.2.3,2.2.6.1.2.5and2.2.6.2.1oftheRequestforProposal(RFP)ontheeligibilityofSmartmaticTIM
asabidder.18

They also claim that Articles 3.3, 6.7, 7.4, 21.1 and 21.4 of the impugned contract violate paragraphs 1 and 3,
Section2,ArticleIXCoftheConstitutionandSection26ofRA9369onthemandateoftheComelec.19
TheyfurthercontendthatArticles3.1,3.2and21.1oftheimpugnedcontractincorporatingtheMarch10,2009
RFPandbiddocumentsissuedbytheComelecviolateSection2,ArticleVoftheConstitutiononthesanctityand
secrecyoftheballot.20
PetitionersexhorttheCourttorecognizetheirlocusstandiinviewofthetranscendentalimportanceofthematters
raisedintheirpetition.21Theyalsopraythattheirfailuretoexhausttheadministrativeremediesprovidedunder
theimplementingrulesofRA9184(ortheGovernmentProcurementReformAct)beexcused.22
In view of the great significance of the matters involved in this case in our national life especially at this critical
juncture of our history, I am inclined to gloss over the technical deficiencies and focus only on the substantive
issues.Nonetheless,aftercarefulstudyandreflection,IvotetodismisstheinstantpetitionforthereasonsIwill
explain.
AretheJune10,2009NoticeofAwardandJuly10,2009ContractLegal?
ThemandateoftheComelecunderRA8436,asamended,istwofold:first,touseanAES(automatedelection
system)asprovidedunderSection1:
Sec.1.DeclarationofPolicy.ItisthepolicyoftheStatetoensurefree,orderly,honest,peaceful,credibleand
informedelections,plebiscites,referenda,recallandothersimilarelectoralexercisesbyimprovingontheelection
processandadoptingsystemswhichshallinvolvetheuseofanautomatedelectionsystemthat will ensure
thesecrecyandsanctityoftheballotandallelection,consolidationandtransmissiondocumentsinorderthatthe
processshallbetransparentandcredibleandthattheresultsshallbefast,accurateandreflectiveofthegenuine
willofthepeople.
TheStaterecognizesthemandateandauthorityoftheCommissiontoprescribetheadoptionanduseof
themostsuitabletechnologyofdemonstratedcapabilitytakingintoaccountthesituationprevailingin
theareaandthefundsavailableforthepurpose.23(emphasissupplied)
Suchauthoritytouse"anautomatedelectionsystemorsystemsxxxasitmaydeemappropriateandpracticalfor
the process of voting, counting of votes and canvassing/consolidation and transmittal of results of electoral
exercises"isreiteratedinSection5ofthelaw,asamended.
Second,asprovidedunderSection12ofthesamelaw,asamended,toprocuresupplies,equipment,materials,
software,facilities,andotherservicesforthepurposeofimplementinganAES.
There are provisions which outline how the Comelec is to carry out its mandate. Section 5 of RA 8436, as
amended,provides:
Sec.5.AuthoritytoUseanAutomatedElectionSystem.Tocarryouttheabovestatedpolicy,theCommission
onElections,hereinreferredtoastheCommission,isherebyauthorizedtouseanautomatedelectionsystemor
systemsinthesameelectionindifferentprovinces,whetherpaperbasedoradirectrecordingelectronicelection
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
nationalandlocalelection,whichshallbeheldimmediatelyaftereffectivityofthisAct,theAESshallbe
usedinatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao,to
be chosen by the Commission:Provided,further, That local government units whose officials have been the
subjectofadministrativechargeswithinsixteen(16)monthpriortotheMay14,2007electionshallnotbechosen:
Provided,finally,ThatnoareashallbechosenwithouttheconsentoftheSanggunianofthelocalgovernmentunit
concerned. The term local government unit as used in this provision shall refer to a highly urbanized city or
province.In succeeding regular national or local elections, the AES shall be implemented nationwide.24
(emphasissupplied)
Moreover,Section12ofRA8436,asamended,states:
Sec.12. Procurement of Equipment and Materials. To achieve the purpose of this Act, the Commission in
authorized to procure, in accordance with existing laws, by purchase, lease, rent or other forms of acquisition,
supplies,equipment,materials,software,facilities,andotherservice,fromlocalorforeignsourcesfreefrom
taxes and import duties, subject to accounting and auditing rules and regulation. With respect to the May 10,
2010 election and succeeding electoral exercises, the system procured must have demonstrated
capability and been successfully used in a prior electoral exercise here or abroad. Participation in the
2007pilotexerciseshallnotbeconclusiveofthesystem'sfitness.xxx25(emphasissupplied)

CitingtheproceedingsoftheSenateonSenateBillNo.2231(fromwhichRA9329originated),26petitionersposit
thatSections5and12ofRA8436,asamended,imposetherestrictionthatnoAEScanbeimplementedinthe
2010 elections unless the said AES shall have been pilottested in at least two highly urbanized cities and two
provinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanaoduringthe2007elections.27Petitionersclaimthattheimpugned
noticeofawardandcontractcontraveneSections5and12ofRA8436,asamended,becausetheyauthorizethe
useofPCOSmachinesthathaveneverundergonepilottesting.
Theviewofpetitionersis,however,atoddswiththeplainlanguageofthelawandtheproceedingsoftheSenate.
TheaforecitedprovisionsdonotlimitorrestrictthestatutorymandateoftheComelectoimplementanationwide
AESbeginningthe2010elections.TheprovisosofSection5merelyprescribetheminimumscopeof,aswellas
the conditions for, the implementation of an AES by the Comelec in the 2007 elections. On the other hand,
Section 12 simply regulates the capability of the supplies, equipment, materials, software, facilities and other
serviceswhichtheComeleccanprocure.Neitherprovision,however,removesorconstrainsthemandateof
theComelectoimplementanAESnationwidebeginningthe2010elections.
AreviewoftheevolutionofSection5ofRA8436,asamended,willshedlightonthematter.
PriortoitsamendmentbyRA9369,Section5wasnumberedSection6ofRA8436.Itprovidedthat"fortheMay
11,1998elections"theComeleccoulduseanAESwhich"shallbeapplicableinallareaswithinthecountryonly
forthepositionsofpresident,vicepresident,senatorsandparties,organizationsorcoalitionsparticipatingunder
thepartylist."28IfbyFebruary9,1998itwouldhavebecomeevidentthattheAEScouldnotbeimplementedfor
national positions in the 1998 elections, the provision stated that elections for both national and local positions
would be done manually except in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao where the automated election
systemwouldbeusedforallpositions.ThethenSection6ofRA8436,therefore,containedthespecificlimitation
orrestrictionthat,whiletheComelecmayimplementanAESnationwideinthe1998elections,itcoulddosoonly
forcertainnationalpositions.However,itdidnotprovidethatifnoAESwouldhavebeenimplementedinthe1998
elections,theComelecwouldforfeititsmandatetoimplementanAESnationwideinthesucceedingelections.
AsamendedandrenumberedbyRA9369,(theformerSection6)Section5ofRA8436containsaprovisowhich
provides that "for the regular national and local election, which shall be held immediately after effectivity of
thisAct,"theComelecshallimplementanAES"inatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinceseachin
Luzon,VisayasandMindanao."Theprecedingclauseissignificantintwoaspects.
First, it refers solely to the May 14, 2007 synchronized national and local elections because the 2007 elections
weretheonlyregularandlocalelectionsheldimmediatelyaftertheeffectivityofRA9369.ItwasheldonFebruary
10,2007.29
Second,byordinarydefinition,thephrase"atleast"setsaminimum30scopebutdoesnotbarattemptsorefforts
toexceedorsurpassit.TheclauseinSection5deliberatelyemploysthephrase"atleast"ratherthan"notmore
than" or the word "only" (as in the original text of Section 5). As qualified, the clause means that, in the 2007
electionstheComelechadthediscretiontoimplementanAESwithintheminimumscopeof"twohighlyurbanized
citiesandtwoprovinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao,"orwithinthemaximumscopeofallareasinthe
country.ItdidnotproscribethenationwideimplementationofanAESinthe2007elections.Nordoesitforbidone
inthe2010andsucceedingelections.
Insum,theaforementionedprovisoofSection5ofRA8436,asamended,merelydelineatestheminimumscope
ofimplementationoftheAESforthe2007elections.
Moresignificantly,intheeventthatnoAESwasimplementedinthe2007elections,Section5doesnotprohibit
the Comelec from implementing an AES nationwide starting in the 2010 elections. Rather, the last clause of
Section 5 is categorical that "in succeeding regular national or local elections, an AES shall be implemented
nationwide."Andthe2010electionsweretheelectionsthatimmediatelyfollowedthe2007elections,theregular
elections"heldimmediatelyaftereffectivityof[RA9369]."Inotherwords,thedirectiveofthelawitselfisclear:the
nationwideimplementationoftheAEScommencesinthe2010elections.
Laws are to be interpreted in a way that will render them effective, not in a manner that will make them
inoperative. To insist, as petitioners do, that no nationwide AES can be implemented in the 2010 elections
because no AES was implemented in the 2007 elections is to disregard the categorical language of the law. It
frustratesanddefeatsthelegislativeintenttofullyautomatethe2010elections.Indeed,ifpetitionersargument
weretobepursuedtoits(notso)logicalconclusion,RA8436,asamendedbyRA9369,wouldbeadeadlaw.
Underpetitionerstheory,noAEScanbeimplementedinanyfutureelectionunlessCongressenactsanotherlaw.
This is so because, according to petitioners themselves, the "condition precedent" for any nationwide
implementation of the AES the implementation of the AES in at least two highly urbanized cities and two
provinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanaointhe2007electionswasnotcompliedwith.

Moreover,consideringthatRA9369tookeffectonlyonFebruary10,2007,itwasalmostimpossibletoutilizean
AESeveninatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanaoduring
the May 14, 2007 elections. Considering that, from the effectivity date of RA 9369, there was only a little over
threemonthsleftbeforethe2007elections,theadditionalburden(onthepreparationsforthe2007elections)of
theprocurementprocessforandimplementationofevenapartialAESofthesaidelectionswouldhavebeena
superhumantask.Moresignificantly,the2007appropriationsfortheComelecdidnotincludeabudgetforAES.
The convergence of time and funding constraints made the implementation of any AES in the 2007 elections
impossible for the Comelec to conduct. Nemo tenetur ad impossibile.31 The law obliges no one to perform an
impossibility.Lawsandrulesmustbeinterpretedinawaythattheyareinaccordancewithlogic,commonsense,
reasonandpracticality.32
Furthermore,Section12ofRA8436,asamended,relevantlystatesthat"[p]articipationinthe2007pilotexercise
shallnotbeconclusiveofthesystemsfitness."Thishasatwofoldimplicationonpetitionersposition.One,since
participationintheintendedautomationofthe2007electionswasnotaconclusivedeterminantofthesystems
fitness,partialautomationofthe2007electionspursuanttotheprovisoofSection5(assumingitwasacondition
forthefull/nationwideautomationofelectionsstarting2010)wasmerelypreferable,notindispensable.Two,the
factthatthePCOSmachineswerenotpilottestedinthe2007electionshasnosignificantbearingonthefitness
andsuitabilityofthosemachinesfortheelectionstobeheldsubsequenttothe2007polls.
TheSenateproceedingsinvokedbypetitionersdonotatallindicatethatpartialimplementationoftheAESinthe
2007electionsisaconditionsinequanontoitsfullimplementationinthe2010elections.Aclosereadingofthe
transcriptoftheproceedingsrevealsthat,inurginghiscolleaguestoapprovetheprovisoinSection5(thatAES
beimplementedinatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcitiesandtwoprovinceseachinLuzon,VisayasandMindanao),
Sen. Richard Gordon, the principal sponsor of Senate Bill No. 2231, was merely underscoring the need to
demonstratethepossibilityandviabilityofpollautomationeveninthe2007elections.33Nowhereinthetranscript
cited by petitioners did the Senate proscribe the nationwide implementation of the AES beginning the 2010
electionsifnopartialAESwasimplementedinthe2007elections.
InadditiontotheclarityofthelanguageofRA8436,asamendedbyRA9369,aswellasthelegislativeintentto
have the nationwide implementation of the AES starting the 2010 elections, the intent of the lawmakers can
furthermore be seen from the passage of RA 9525 on March 23, 2009. With this law, an P11,301,790,000
supplemental appropriations was specifically made for the automation of the 2010 elections. When Congress
passedRA9525,itwaswellawarethattherewasnopilottestingofthePCOSinanypreviousPhilippineelectoral
exercise.Nonetheless,Section2ofthelawstatesthatthesumshouldbedisbursedtoensurethe"transparency
andaccuracyintheselectionoftherelevanttechnologyofthemachinestobeusedonMay10,2010automated
nationalandlocalelection[s]."
In fine, under Section 5 in relation to Section 1 of RA 8436, as amended, the mandate of the Comelec to
prescribe the adoption and use of an AES is complete. It can determine which suitable technology of
demonstrated capability to adopt for an AES. It can determine which, between a paperbased or a direct
recording electronic election system, is more appropriate and practical. More notably, in the 2007 elections, it
could decide whether to implement an AES within a maximum scope of all areas in the country or within the
minimum scope of two highly urbanized cities and two provinces each in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao. And in
the2010andsucceedingelections,itsunqualifiedmandateistoimplementanAESnationwide.
Therefore, when it issued the notice of award to and executed the contract with SmartmaticTIM for the
nationwideimplementationofanAESinthe2010elections,theComelecactedpursuanttoitsmandateanddid
notviolateSection5ofRA8436asamendedbyRA9369.
Neither did the Comelec violate Section 12 of RA 8436, as amended. The provision merely requires that, to
implement a nationwide AES starting from the 2010 elections, the Comelec must procure a system that has a
demonstrated capability and has been successfully used in a prior electoral exercise here or abroad, though
applicationofthesysteminthe2007electionswouldnothavebeenconclusiveevidenceofitsfitness.Clearly,itis
notimperativethatthesystemwassuccessfullyappliedinthe2007electionsitsufficesthatthesystemcanbe
showntohavebeenviableinanelectionabroad.AstheComelecaverred,thesystemitprocuredforthe2010
electionswassuccessfullyemployedinpriorelectoralexercisesinNewBrunswickandNewYorkin2008andin
Ontarioin2009.34
Did the June 10, 2009 Notice of Award and the July 10, 2009 Contract Comply With Requirements on
BiddingEligibility?
Petitioners impugn the notice of award and contract in favor of Smartmatic TIM on the ground that the latter
violatedtheRFPwhenitfailedtosubmitavalidjointventureagreement(JVA),acopyofitssinglelargestcontract
forthelastthreeyears,anISO9001certificateandanenvironmentalprotectionagencycertification.
Petitionersarewrong.

ValidityoftheJVA
Under RA 9184,35 to be eligible to bid for a project involving the procurement of goods, a joint venture must
submit a valid JVA36 which must be duly notarized and under oath.37 It is further required by Section 8 of RA
7042inrelationtoEO584thatFilipinoownershiporinterestinthejointventurebeatleast60%.38
TheforegoingrequirementswerereiteratedunderItems2.2.4and2.2.6.2.1oftheRFP.
OnApril23,2009SmartmaticandTIMconstitutedthemselvesintoanunincorporatedjointventureunderaJVA.
TheysubmittedtheirJVAtotheComeleconMay4,200939andonJuly8,2009,theycausedtheincorporationof
theirjointventurewiththeSecuritiesandExchangeCommission(SEC).40
Petitioners contend that SmartmaticTIM failed to seasonably comply with the eligibility requirements of the law
becausetheywerestillunincorporatedatthetimetheyfiledtheirJVAintheComelec.Theirlackofcommunityof
interest surfaced in late June 2009 when the two entities publicly bickered over their rights and obligations.
Moreover, petitioners claim that the JVA is defective because it left out key parties to the automation project,
namely,JarltechfromwhichSmartmaticwillprocurethePCOSmachines,Dominionwhichownsthecopyrightto
the software for the PCOS machines and 2Go which will be responsible for transporting/distributing PCOS
machines throughout the country. Petitioners insist that the inclusion of Jarltech, Dominion and 2Go in the joint
venture is indispensable to hold them solidarily liable with SmartmaticTIM for any problem that may arise from
theuseoftheirautomationsystem.41
Petitionersexaggeratetheeligibilityrequirementsofthelaw.
RA9184anditsimplementingrulesonlyrequirethattheJVAbevalidandnotarized.IncorporationofaJVAunder
the Corporation Code through registration with the SEC is not essential for the validity of a JVA. So long as it
meetstheessentialrequisitesofacontract42andisembodiedinapublicdocument,aJVAisvalidregardlessof
its incorporation through registration with the SEC. Where the law makes no distinction, no distinction need be
made.
Since the validity of the JVA is separate and distinct from its incorporation, I cannot subscribe to petitioners
positionthattheincorporationoftheSmartmaticandTIMJVAmustalsoberequiredforpurposesofthebidding.
ToholdthattheJVAoughttobeaccompaniedbyarticlesofincorporationistoundulyaddtotherequirementof
thelawanditsimplementingregulations,intheguiseofinterpretationorconstruction.
Even without an accompanying incorporation paper, a JVA is considered valid if notarized and under oath. As
explainedbytheGovernmentProcurementPolicyBoard(GPPB):43
Forpurposesofconductingeligibilityontheprospectivebiddersfortheprocurementofgoodsandinfrastructure
projects,Section23.6(2)oftheIRRAofR.A.9184requirestheprospectivebidderstosubmitthefollowingClass
"B"Documents:
(a)Validjointventureagreement,incaseofajointventureand
(b)LetterauthorizingtheBACoritsdulyauthorizedrepresentative/stoverifyanyorallofthedocuments
submittedfortheeligibilitycheck.
As regards the requirement of a "valid joint venture agreement" for JV bidders, the IRRA of R.A. 9184
doesnotprescribeastandardformnordoesitspelloutthespecifictermsandconditionsthatshould
beincludedinsuchagreementtobevalid.However,forpurposesofeligibilitycheck,allJVAsarerequiredto
benotarizedinordertobeconsideredvalidasprescribedintheaforequotedsection.Further,itisadvisedthat
theJVAsshouldspecificallystatethenameofthepersonwhoisappointedasthelawfulattorneyinfactoftheJV
tosignthecontract,ifawarded,andthememberwhoistheleadrepresentativeoftheconcernedJV.44(emphasis
added)
It would likewise be an unreasonable imposition not only on SmartmaticTIM to absorb into their joint venture
each and every entity they do business with, but also on the Comelec to transact directly with all these other
entities. Aware of this, the Comelecs Instruction to Bidders allowed the bidders to subcontract portions of the
goodsorservicesundertheautomationproject.45
RA9184providesunderArticleXVIfordirectcontractingasoneofthealternativemethodsofprocurement.Direct
contractingorsinglesourceprocurementdoesnotrequireelaboratebiddingbecauseallthesupplierneedstodo
is submit a price quotation, which offer may then be accepted immediately, but only under the following
conditions:(a)whenthegoodsmaybeobtainedonlyfromtheproprietarysourcebecausepatents,tradesecrets
and copyrights prohibit others from manufacturing the same item (b) when procurement of critical components
fromaspecificmanufacturer,supplierordistributorisaconditionprecedenttoholdacontractortoguaranteeits

projectperformanceand(c)thosesoldbyanexclusivedealerormanufacturer,whichdoesnothaveasubdealer
selling.Clearlythen,theintentionofRA9184isnottocompelgovernmentagenciestodealwitheverycopyright
holder, exclusive manufacturer and exclusive distributor otherwise, it will restrict the mode of procurement to
directcontractingonly.Thus,thereisnocompulsionunderthelawfortheComelectocontractwithDominionas
the holder of the copyright to the PCOS machine or with Jarltech as the manufacturer thereof or 2Go as the
transporter/distributorofthePCOSmachines.WhatiscrucialisthatSmartmaticTIMassumessolidaryliabilityfor
theprincipalprestationoftheJuly10,2009contractandtheRFP,andthatitstipulates(underArticle3.3ofthe
contract)that"theperformanceofportionsthereofbyotherpersonsorentitiesnotpartiestothisContractshall
notrelieve[it]ofsaidobligationsandconcomitantliabilities."
CompliancewiththeNationalityRequirement
Regarding the ownership requirement under RA 7042 and the RFP, the JVA and articles of incorporation of
SmartmaticTIM categorically state that 60% of the shares of the joint venture shall be held by TIM itself or its
subsidiary while 40% shall be held by Smartmatic itself or its subsidiary, but each shall be jointly and severally
liabletotheComelecfortheobligationsoftheotherundertheRFP.46
However, notwithstanding the clarity of the provisions of the JVA and the articles of incorporation, petitioners
arguethatthe6040%controlofthejointventurebyTIMandSmartmatic,respectively,ismerelyonpaperand
that, in reality, Smartmatic has control equal to or greater than TIM. According to petitioners, Smartmatics
nominateddirectorcandeterminethequorumintheboardofdirectorsandtheexecutivecommittee,andapprove
orvetotheactsoftheboardorexecutivecommittee.Smartmaticalonecannominatethechairmanoftheboard,
thetreasurerandthecorporatesecretary.47
Butthen,itisnotthemanagementbuttheownershipofthejointventureSmartmaticTIMwhichisrequiredtobe
atleast60%Filipino.Theboardofdirectorsofacorporationisacreationofthestockholdersand,assuch,the
boardcontrolsanddirectstheaffairsofthecorporationbydelegationofthestockholders.48Hence,theauthority
to be exercised by the board of directors of the joint venture of SmartmaticTIM is actually the authority of the
stockholders of TIM and Smartmatic from which the joint venture derives its authority. As the source of the
authority, the stockholders may by autolimitation impose restraints or restrictions on their own powers such as
thatallegedlydonebyTIMinitsjointventurewithSmartmatic.Besides,issuesonthedistributionofmanagement
powersinthejointventureareapurelybusinessprerogativeinwhichtheCourtwouldrathernotmeddle.49
SubmissionofRequiredDocuments
WithregardtopetitionersclaimthatSmartmaticTIMfailedtocomplywiththerequirementundertheRFPforthe
jointventuretosubmitthefollowingtechnicaldocuments:(1)astatementofthevalueofitslargestsinglecontract
forthelastthreeyears50 (2) ISO 9000 certificate or its equivalent51 and (3) certification from the environment
protectionagencyofthecountryoforiginoftheproduct,52theComelecSBACnotedinitsmemorandumdated
June3,2009that,whileSmartmaticTIMfailedtoshowacopyofitssinglelargestcontract(becauseofitsnon
disclosure agreement with the election body of Venezuela), SmartmaticTIM submitted "a duly authenticated
certificationfromtheConsejoNacionalElectoral(CNE)oftheVenezuelangovernmentxxxindicatingtheamount
of the contract as [$141,356,604.54], (equivalent to Php6,345,502,017.90) which was well above the eligibility
requirement of at least 50% of the Approved Budget for the Contract (ABC) of Php5,611,809,200.50." The
certificationfurtherindicates"thenameofthevendorSmartmaticGroup,thenameofprocuringentityCNE,the
periodofthecontractbetween01June2008to28February2009andthedescriptionofgoodsandservices
providedtoprovidevotingmachinesandsuppliesfortheelectionsintheBolivarianRepublicofVenezuela."53
Thus, the ComelecSBAC recommended that this certification be admitted under Section 19, Rule 132 of the
RulesofCourtasitwasissuedbyagovernmentofanothercountryanddulyauthenticatedbytheofficialsofthe
Philippine embassy.54 The ComelecSBACs recommendation was approved by the Comelec en banc in
ResolutionNo.8608datedJune9,2009.55
ThereisnocogentreasontooverturntheresolutionoftheComelecenbancapprovingtherecommendationof
theComelecSBAConthismatter.Itshouldbeborneinmindthat,asexpresslystatedinSection23.11.1.1,Rule
VIIIoftheimplementingrulesofRA9184,thepurposeoftherequirementistoestablishthetrackrecordofthe
prospectivebidderofhavingcompletedwithinthelastthreeyearsasinglecontractsimilartothecontracttobe
biddedout.ThispurposewasservedwhenCNEcertifiedthatSmartmatichadimplementedinVenezuelaa$141
Millionprojectsimilartotheoneitwasbiddingfor.Withsuchauthenticatedinformationmadeavailabletoit,the
Comeleccorrectlydispensedwithacopyofthecontractitself.
The Comelec also did not err in accepting the ISO 9000 and EPA certifications submitted by SmartmaticTIM.
Though not required under RA 9184, ISO 9000 and EPA certificates are required under the RFP. An ISO
certificate is intended to assure the Comelec "that the manufacturing process of the solution provider complies
withinternationalstandards."56ThispurposeisneverthelessstillachievedifthePCOSmachinesareproducedby
a facility that has an ISO 9000 certification.57 It is of record that the PCOS machines to be procured by the

Comelec are manufactured for Smartmatic by its subsidiary Jarltech. Thus, the ISO certification of Jarltech
providessufficientassurancethatthePCOSmachinesaremanufacturedaccordingtointernationalstandards.
ThesameprincipleappliestotheEPAcertificate.Itspurposeistoestablishthattheproducttobeprocuredmeets
theenvironmentalstandardsofthecountryoforigin.58TheEPAcertificatesubmittedbySmartmaticTIMserves
thatpurposeeventhoughitisinthenameofKenmecMechanicalEngineeringCompany(Kenmec).Asfoundby
the ComelecSBAC, Kenmec has an outsourcing manufacturing contract with Jarltech under which Kenmec will
provideaspacewithinitsfacilitywhereSmartmatic,throughJarltech,willassembleandmanufacturethePCOS
machines.59ItislogicalfortheEPAcertificatetobeissuedtoKenmecsfacility.
In sum, SmartmaticTIM substantially complied with the technical requirements for eligibility. Accordingly, no
bidding requirement under the law and the RFP was violated by the notice of award and the contract issued to
SmartmaticTIM.
DoestheJuly10,2009ContractDiminishtheCOMELECsConstitutionalMandate?
TheConstitutionappointedtheComelecasthesoleauthoritytoenforceandadministeralllawsandregulations
relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite, initiative, referendum and recall,60 and to decide all questions
affectingelections,exceptthoseinvolvingtherighttovote,.61
Petitioners deplore what they claim to be a denigration of the mandate of the Comelec through the following
provisionsinitscontractwithSmartmaticTIM:
3.3 The PROVIDER62 shall be liable for all its obligations under this Project, and the performance of portions
thereofbyotherpersonsorentitiesnotpartiestothisContractshallnotrelievethePROVIDERofsaidobligations
andconcomitantliabilities.
SMARTMATIC, as the joint venture partner with the greater track record in automated elections, shall be in
charge of the technical aspects of the counting and canvassing software and hardware, including transmission
configuration and system integration. SMARTMATIC shall also be primarily responsible for preventing and
troubleshootingtechnicalproblemsthatmayariseduringtheelection.
The PROVIDER must provide to SMARMATIC at all times the support required to perform the above
responsibilities.
xxxxxxxxx
6.7 Subject to the provisions of the General Instructions to be issued by the Commission En Banc, the entire
processes of voting, counting, transmission, consolidation and canvassing of votes shall be conducted by
COMELEC's personnel and officials, and their performance, completion and final results according to
specifications and within the specified periods shall be the shared responsibility of the COMELEC and the
PROVIDER.
xxxxxxxxx
7.4UpondeliveryoftheGoods,inwholeorinpart,tothewarehousesasapprovedbyCOMELEC,theequipment
shallbeunderthecustody,responsibilityandcontrolofthePROVIDER.
xxxxxxxxx
Accordingtopetitioners,themandateoftheComelecisseriouslyunderminedbytheseprovisions.Article3.3of
the contract authorizes Smartmatic to supervise and control the technical aspect of the AES, whereas under
Section 26 of RA 8436, it is the Comelec information technology department (ComelecITD) which should be
givensuchcontrol.Ontheotherhand,Articles6.7and7.4ofthecontractassigntoSmartmaticTIMportionsof
theelectoralresponsibilitiesoftheComelec,whereastheConstitutionmandatestheauthorityoftheComelecto
beexclusive.
Moreover, by virtue of Articles 21.1 and 21.4 of the contract, bid document no. 10 is deemed part thereof.
According to the bid document, it is SmartmaticTIM which shall generate the digital signature and assign the
sametoallthemembersoftheboardofinspectors,theboardofcanvassers,theComelec,theSenatePresident
and the House Speaker. To petitioners mind, since SmartmaticTIM has custody of the digital signature, it has
virtual control of the election result as it is the digital signature which authenticates the election returns for the
canvassingofvotes.63
Petitionersfearsareunfounded.
We expect that, with the advent of electronic voting, procurement contracts will be accompanied by concerns

abouttheirtendencytoobscuretraditionallinesofresponsibility.Nonetheless,welldesignedandcarefullycrafted
contracts will represent neither an abdication of the Comelecs mandate nor a restraint on the Comelecs
oversightpowers,butratheravalidreconfigurationmuchneededinelectionadministration.
The Comelec took pains to draft a contract that preserves its constitutional and statutory responsibilities and at
thesametimemeetsthenovelcontingenciesresultingfromtheautomationofelections.
For the 2010 automated elections, the Comelec exercises not only exclusive supervision and control of the
electoralprocess,64includingthediscretionoverwhichsuitabletechnologytoadoptanduse.65Article6.7ofthe
contractreiteratestheauthorityoftheComelecoverthepurelyelectoralcomponentoftheprocess,thus:
6.7 Subject to the provisions of the General Instructions to be issued by the Commission En Banc, the entire
processes of voting, counting, transmission, consolidation and canvassing of votes shall be conducted by
Comelec'spersonnelandofficialsxxx.
With respect to the technical component of the Comelecs authority in the automation of elections, several
specializedunitshavebeencreatedunderRA8436andRA9369tosupporttheCommission:(1)anInformation
Technology Department tasked to carry out the full administration and implementation of the AES66 (2) an
Advisory Council on Information and Communication and Technology,67 headed by the Chairman of the
Commission,taskedtorecommendthetechnologytobeappliedintheAESandtoadviseandassistinthereview
of its systems planning, inception, development, testing, operationalization and evaluation stages and in the
identification,assessmentandresolutionofsystemsproblemsorinadequacies,68and(3)aTechnicalEvaluation
Committeetaskedtocertifythat,basedondocumentedevaluation,thehardwareandsoftwarecomponentsofthe
chosenAESareoperatingproperly,securely,andaccurately,inaccordancewiththeprovisionsofRA9369.69
Moreover, under the contract, the Comelec committed to create a project management office (PMO) that will
overseetheexecutionandimplementationoftheautomationproject.70
Thus,bothunderthelawandthecontract,itisclearthateachoftheforegoingunitsoftheComelecisassigned
specifictechnicalfunctionsinsupportoftheAES.
1 a v v p h i1

Ontheotherhand,SmartmaticisgivenaspecificandlimitedtechnicaltasktoassisttheComelecinimplementing
theAES.ThehighlyspecializedlanguageofthecontractcircumscribestheroleofSmartmatic.
For instance, while, under Article 6.7, the counting and canvassing of votes are the responsibilities of the
Comelec, under Article 3.3, the technical aspects of the "counting and canvassing software and hardware,
including transmission configuration and system integration," and the "[prevention] and troubleshooting [of]
technical problems that may arise during the election" are the responsibilities of Smartmatic. The delineation of
rolesisclearandthetasksassignedtoSmartmaticarespecific.BynostretchofinterpretationcanArticle3.3be
deemedtomeanthatSmartmaticshallcountandcanvassthevotes.
StillunderArticle6.7,itistheComelecthroughitspersonnelandofficialsthatshallconducttheentireprocesses
of voting, counting, transmission, consolidation and canvassing of votes. The Comelec, jointly with Smartmatic,
will ensure that the performance, completion and final results of these processes meet the stipulated
specificationsandschedules.ThisareasonableassignmentofroletoSmartmatic,consideringthat,underArticles
3.1.a, 3.1.b and 3.2 of the contract, SmartmaticTIM undertakes to ensure the proper, satisfactory and timely
executionandcompletionoftheentirescopeoftheproject.71Thereisnoreasontoviewitasadiminutionofthe
exclusivemandateoftheComelectocontroltheconductoftheelections.
Ithaslikewisenotbeenestablishedthat,underArticle7.4ofthecontract,theComelecabnegateditsmandate.It
must be borne in mind that the contract entered into by the Comelec is a mere lease with option to purchase.
Hence, it will be grossly disadvantageous to the Comelec if, upon delivery of the goods by SmartmaticTIM,
custodythereofwillbeimmediatelytransferredtoit,forthenliabilityfordamagetoorlossofthegoodswhilein
storagewillbebornebyit.ItisbadenoughthatFilipinotaxpayersarefootingthebillforthecontinuedstorageof
machines in the scrapped Mega Pacific consortium automation deal. It will be worse if they should likewise be
answerableforanyPCOSmachinethatisdamagedorlostduringstorage.
AretheSanctityoftheBallotandtheIntegrityoftheAutomatedElectoralProcessCompromisedBytheJuly10,
2009Contract?
Themoreseriousargumentraisedbypetitionershastodowiththesanctityoftheballotandtheintegrityofthe
AES.
Petitioners argue that the constitutional right of the people to the secrecy and sanctity of their ballot is
compromisedbytherequirementunderthecontractandtheRFPthattheballotbeapproximatelythreefeetlong
andpreprintedwiththenamesofatleast600candidatesandthatitbemanuallyfedintothePCOSmachinewith

theassistanceofaSmartmaticTIMemployee,whenneeded.72
UnderSection2,ArticleVoftheConstitution,itisCongresswhichisprimarilytaskedwiththedutytoprovidea
systemofsecuringthesecrecyandsanctityoftheballot.Infulfillmentofitsduty,Congressadoptedthefollowing
provisionsinRA9369,towit:
Sec.13.Section11ofRepublicActNo.8436isherebyamendedtoreadasfollows:
"Sec.15.OfficialBallot.TheCommissionshallprescribetheformatoftheelectronicdisplayand/orthe
size and form of the official ballot, which shall contain the titles of the position to be filled and/or the
proposition to be voted upon in an initiative, referendum or plebiscite. Where practicable, electronic
displaysmustbeconstructedtopresentthenamesofallcandidatesforthesamepositioninthesame
pageorscreen,otherwise,theelectronicdisplaysmustbeconstructedtopresenttheentireballottothe
voter, in a series of sequential pages, and to ensure that the voter sees all of the ballot options on all
pagesbeforecompletinghisorhervoteandtoallowthevotertoreviewandchangeallballotchoices
prior to completing and casting his or her ballot. Under each position to be filled, the names of
candidates shall be arranged alphabetically by surname and uniformly indicated using the same type
size. The maiden or married name shall be listed in the official ballot, as preferred by the female candidate.
Undereachpropositiontobevoteupon,thechoicesshouldbeuniformlyindicatedusingthesamefontandsize.
xxxxxxxxx
Sec.18.Procedureinvoting.TheCommissionshallprescribethemannerandprocedureofvoting,whichcan
beeasilyunderstoodandfollowedbythevoters,takingintoconsideration,amongotherthings,thesecrecyofthe
voting.
While delegating to the Comelec the determination of the size and form of the ballot, Congress prescribed the
followingminimumrequirementsofitscontent:(1)thatitshallcontainthetitlesofthepositiontobefilledand/or
thepropositiontobevoteduponinaninitiative,referendumorplebiscite(2)thatundereachpositiontobefilled,
the names of candidates shall be arranged alphabetically by surname and uniformly indicated using the same
typesizeand(3)thatthevotermustseealloftheballotoptionsonallpagesbeforecompletinghisorhervote
andtoallowthevotertoreviewandchangeallballotchoicespriortocompletingandcastinghisorherballot.
Ineffect,thebasiccontentsoftheballotasrequiredbyCongressdictatethesizeandformoftheballotthatthe
Comelecshallprescribe.Foraslongastherequirementsaremet,thesystemofsecrecyandsanctityoftheballot
adoptedbyCongressunderRA9369isdeemedobservedbytheComelec.
There is no showing that the size and form of the PCOS ballot as prescribed by the Comelec do not fulfill the
minimumcontentsrequiredbyCongress.Infact,thethreefoot,twopageballotfilledwith600entriesinfont10
was deliberately adopted by the Comelec to conform to the requirements of existing laws on the number of
electivepositions,andinanticipationofthepossiblenumberofcandidatesvyingforthesepositions.
Moreover, there is no inherent flaw in the voting procedure adopted by the Comelec whereby each voter must
manually feed the ballot into the PCOS machine. There are sufficient safeguards to the secrecy of the voting
processinthatthevoteralonewillholdtheballotandfeedittothePCOSmachine.Itisalluptothevoterwhether
todiscardcautionanddisclosethecontentsoftheballot.Thelawcanonlydosomuchinprotectingitssanctity.
Besides,assumingthattherequirementunderthecontractbetweentheComelecandSmartmaticTIMastothe
sizeoftheballotposesconcernsinconnectionwiththesecrecyoftheballot,theComelecisnotwithoutpowerto
issue the necessary rules and regulations that will effectively address them. Such rules and regulations may
includethespecificmanneronhowassistanceonfeedingtheballottoaPCOSmachinemayberenderedtoa
votertoavoidcompromisingthesecrecyoftheballot.
Finally,petitionersarealarmedthatthedigitalsignature,securitykeys,sourcecodeandremovablememorycard
are at the disposal of SmarmaticTIM. They argue that all this puts SmartmaticTIM in control not only of the
processbutalsotheoutcomeoftheelection.73
There are highly technical, specialized interstitial matters that Congress does not decide itself but delegates to
specializedagenciestodecide.74InRA9369,Congressdelegatedtonotjustonebutfourspecializedbodiesthe
dutytoensurethattheAEStobeadoptedforthe2010electionswillbethemostappropriateandsecure.These
aretheComelecitself,theComelecITD,theAdvisoryCouncilandtheTechnicalEvaluationCommittee.Iamnot
prepared to say that we should doubt their ability and their dedication to ensure compliance with the minimum
capabilitiesandfeaturesoftheAES,asprescribedunderSections6and7ofRA9369.
It is significant that among the functions of the Advisory Council is to "provide advice and/or assistance in the
identification,assessmentandresolutionofsystemsproblemsorinadequaciesasmaysurfaceorresurfaceinthe
courseofthebidding,acquisition,testing,operationalization,reuse,storageordispositionoftheAESequipment

and/or resources as the case may be."75 Furthermore, the Technical Evaluation Committee is assigned these
functions:
Sec.9.Newsections8,9,10and11areherebyprovidedtoreadasfollows:
"Sec. 11. Functions of the Technical Evaluation Committee. The Committee shall certify, through an
establishedinternationalcertificationentitytobechosenbytheCommissionfromtherecommendations
of the Advisory Council, not later than three months before the date of the electoral exercises,
categorically stating that the AES, including its hardware and software components, is operating
properly,securely,andaccurately,inaccordancewiththeprovisionsofthisActbased,amongothers,on
thefollowingdocumentedresults:
1. The successful conduct of a field testing process followed by a mock election event in one or more
cities/municipalities
2. The successful completion of audit on the accuracy, functionally and security controls of the AES
software
3.Thesuccessfulcompletionofasourcecodereview
4.AcertificationthatthesourcecodeiskeptinescrowwiththeBangkoSentralngPilipinas
5.Acertificationthatthesourcecodereviewedisoneandthesameasthatusedbytheequipmentand
6.Thedevelopment,provisioning,andoperationalizationofacontinuityplantocoverriskstotheAESatall
pointsintheprocesssuchthatafailureofelections,whetheratvoting,countingorconsolidation,maybe
avoided.(emphasisadded)
It has not been satisfactorily shown that the Advisory Council and the Technical Evaluation Committee have
shirked their duties. They have not even been given the chance to perform them yet they are already being
torpedoed.Atthispoint,theCourtshouldnotevenattempttointerfereintheworkofthesespecializedbodiesand
arrogate their functions by deciding highly technical issues that are within their expertise and knowledge, and
whichthelawitselfhasassignedtothemfordetermination.TheCourthastoexercisejudicialrestraintandnot
pretendtobeanexpertinsomethingitisnotreallyfamiliarwith.Ourfunctionismerelytodecideifautomation
anditsimplementingcontract(s)arelegalornot.Itisnottofindfaultinitandcertainly,nottodeterminetowhat
extentthelawshouldbeorshouldnotbeimplemented.Afterahalfcenturyofelectoraldebacle,thereloomsin
the horizon the dawn of a truly honest, systematic and modern electoral system. But we have to cast our fears
andinsecuritiesaside,andtakethefirststepunsureasitmaybetowitnessitscoming.
Fifteen years ago, the government launched the first online lottery ("lotto") system in the country. Back then,
brickbatsflewthickandfastthatitwasnothingbutagovernmentracketonagrandscale,thatithadabuiltin
capabilitytocheatpeopleoftheirhardearnedmoney,thatgovernmentwasabdicatingabigpartofitsfinancesto
the Malaysians, that its computers were going to be used to cheat in the elections and a slew of pseudo
intellectualargumentsadnauseam.Butwhathaslottobecometoday?Ithasbecomeoneofthemostsuccessful
governmentprojectsever,heraldedasoneofthebetterlotterysystemsinanydevelopingcountry.Practicallythe
entire nation has been "wired together" under one efficient computer system. It has brought in billions to the
government coffers and has helped millions of poor beneficiaries of the Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office.
Whatcouldhavecomeoutofitifthecorrectfirststephadneverbeenboldlytaken?
AFinalWord
We are the final generation of an old civilization and the first generation of a new one. Much of our personal
confusion, anguish and disorientation can be traced directly to the conflict within us and within our political
institutions, between the dying Second Wave civilization and the emergent Third Wave civilization that is
thunderingintotakeitsplace.Tofflerswordsfittinglydescribethestateofourelectoralsystem.
Congress has vested the Comelec with the authority to modernize the Philippine electoral system through the
adoptionofanAES.IntheexerciseofthesaidauthorityandconsideringthenatureoftheofficeoftheComelec
asanindependentconstitutionalbodyspecificallytaskedtoenforceandadministeralllawsrelativetotheconduct
of elections, the Comelec enjoys wide latitude in carrying out its mandate. No worstcase scenarios painted by
doomsayers, no speculative political catastrophe should be the basis of invalidating the Comelecs official acts.
Only when the exercise by the Comelec of its discretion is done with grave abuse will this Court nullify the
challenged discretionary act. Otherwise, the institutional independence of the Comelec will be unduly restricted
anderoded,anditsconstitutionalandstatutoryprerogativesencroachedupon.ThisCourtshouldnotallowthatin
anysituation.ThisCourtshouldnotallowthatinthiscase.
Letuswelcomethesignificantchangeinourelectoralsystemthatistheautomatedelectionsystem.Thefutureis

upon us. It beckons as it poses the challenge of spurring technological innovation and safeguarding values like
accuracyandtransparencyinourelectoralsystem.Letusnotturnourbacksonitsimplyoutofspeculationand
fear.Letusgiveitachance.
IvotetoDISMISSthepetition.
RENATOC.CORONA
AssociateJustice

Footnotes
1AlvinToffler,TheThirdWave.
2SeeChapter18,RevisedAdministrativeCodeofthePhilippineIslandsof1917.SeealsoActNo.1582,

effectiveJanuary15,1907.
3RequestforProposals(RFP)issuedbytheCommissiononElectionsforthe2010electionsautomation

project.
4RepublicAct.
5AnactauthorizingtheCommissiononElectionstoconductanationwidedemonstrationofacomputerized

electionsystemandpilottestitintheMarch1996electionsintheAutonomousRegioninMuslimMindanao
(ARMM)andforotherpurposes.
6 An act authorizing the Commission on Elections to use and automated election system in the May 11,

1998 national or local elections and in subsequent national and local electoral exercises, providing funds
thereforandforotherpurposes.
7AnactamendingRepublicActNo.8436.
8Anactappropriatingthesumofelevenbillionthreehundredonemillionsevenhundredninetythousand

pesos(P11,301,790,000.00)assupplementalappropriationforanautomatedelectionsystemandforother
purposes.
9Annex"A",Petition.
10Annex"13",Comment.
11www.comelec.gov.ph/modernization/2010
12Petition,pp.4647.
13ManifestationandMemorandumforPetitioner,pp.107108.
14Petition,pp.2831ManifestationandMemorandumforPetitioners,pp.5380.
15ForeignInvestmentsActof1991.
16ExecutiveOrder.
17SeventhRegularForeignInvestmentNegativeListdatedDecember8,2006.
18Petition,pp.3240ManifestationandMemorandumforPetitioners,pp.8193.
19ManifestationandMemorandumforPetitioners,pp.1729,4952.
20Id.,pp.3748.
21ManifestationandMemorandum,
22ManifestationandMemorandum,pp.94100.

23Theoriginaltextread:

Section1.Declarationofpolicy.ItisthepolicyoftheStatetoensurefree,orderly,honest,peaceful
andcredibleelections,andassurethesecrecyandsanctityoftheballotinorderthattheresultsof
elections,plebiscites,referenda,andotherelectoralexercisesshallbefast,accurateandreflectiveof
thegenuinewillofthepeople.
24Theoriginaltextread:

Section6.Authoritytouseanautomatedelectionsystem.Tocarryouttheabovestatedpolicy,the
Commission on Elections, herein referred to as the Commission, is hereby authorized to use an
automatedelectionsystem,hereinreferredtoastheSystem,fortheprocessofvoting,countingof
votesandcanvassing/consolidationofresultsofthenationalandlocalelections:Provided,however,
That for the May 11, 1998 elections, the System shall be applicable in all areas within the
country only for the positions of president, vicepresident, senators and parties,
organizationsorcoalitionsparticipatingunderthepartylistsystem.
ToachievethepurposeofthisAct,theCommissionisauthorizedtoprocurebypurchase,leaseor
otherwiseanysupplies,equipment,materialsandservicesneededfortheholdingoftheelectionsby
anexpeditedprocessofpublicbiddingofvendors,suppliersorlessors:Provided,Thattheaccredited
political parties are duly notified of and allowed to observe but not to participate in the bidding. If,
inspite of its diligent efforts to implement this mandate in the exercise of this authority, it
becomes evident by February 9, 1998 that the Commission cannot fully implement the
automatedelectionsystemfornationalpositionsintheMay11,1998elections,theelections
for both national and local positions shall be done manually except in the Autonomous
RegioninMuslimMindanao(ARMM)wheretheautomatedelectionsystemshallbeusedfor
allpositions.(emphasissupplied)
25Theoriginaltextread:

Section8.Procurementofequipmentandmaterials.TheCommissionshallprocuretheautomated
counting machines, computer equipment, devices and materials needed for ballot printing and
devicesforvoting,countingandcanvassingfromlocalorforeignsourcesfreefromtaxesandimport
duties,subjecttoaccountingandauditingrulesandregulations.
26ManifestationandMemorandum,pp.5761,citingRecordsoftheSenate,VolumesIIandIII.
27Petition,p.28.
28Supraat21.
29Section47,RA9369providesthatthelawshalltakeeffect15daysafteritspublicationinanewspaperof

generalcirculation.ItwasfirstpublishedintheJanuary26,2007issueofMalaya.
30www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary.
31Stemmerikv.Mas,A.C.No.8010,16June2009.
32Id.
33ManifestationandMemorandum,p.57.

ThefollowingrelevantstatementsofSenatorGordonduringtheSenatedeliberationsonOctober11,
2006regardingSenateBillNo.2231isenlightening:
Sen.Gordon:
x x x Our position, Mr. President, is that this bill is essentially an amendment of an original bill that
saysautomationofelection,whichmeansthatithasalreadystarted.xxx
So,wearesaying,Mr.President,thatbasedonthat,withallthesethingsthatarecoveredalready,
in fact, there is practically a delegation of authority given to the Comelec which, by the way, is
constitutionally the implementor of elections to the advisory council and to the oversight committee
whichiscomposedofsevensenatorsandsevencongressmen.xxx
xxxTheproponents(Sen.Roxas)amendmentwilltakeactsofCongresstocontinueAES.

Inotherwords,Congresshastoacttocontinuetheautomatedelectionsystem.Inourproposal,it
willtakeanactofCongresstostopAES.Inotherwords,thegeneralruleis,AESisnowona
heuristicpath,umaandarnaiyan.Thereportshavealreadybeengiven,thebudgetwillstill
havetobeapprovedforthat,whichmeanscongressionalactionwillbetakeneverystepof
theway.xxx
Kaya nga ang sinasabi ko, magiging ludicrous tayo na in 1997, ang sabi natin automation.
Hindipoitotest.Itopoaydesisyonnatinnapairalinnaiyongautomationsasixprovinces
andsixcitiesbecausegaholnahotayosaoras.Wehaveranoutoftime.xxx
xxxIfindthathinditayolumalakadkungbabalikulittayosa2010sasixprovincesandsix
cities,paraanopaatnaglalagaytayongautomatedelectiontitledito?AllIamsayingisthat,
oncewegoonautomation,weshouldmoveon.xxx(SenateDeliberations,11October2006,p.
191200.)(emphasissupplied)
34Memorandumforpublicrespondent,p.60,citingAnnexes"12","13"and"14".
35GovernmentProcurementReformActeffectiveJanuary26,2003.
36Sec.23.6.2(a),RuleVIII,ImplementingRulesandRegulationsofRA9184.
37Id.atSec.2.2.7.
38SeealsoSec.23.11.1,ImplementingRulesandRegulationsofRA9184.
39Annex5,p.9,Commentofpublicrespondent.
40Annex12,Commentofpublicrespondent.
41Memorandum,pp.9092.
42Theseessentialelementsareconsent,objectcertainandcause.
43Sec.63,RA9184.
44

GPBB
opinion
NPM
No.
NPM
0982004
dated
July
23,
2004.
www.gppb.gov.ph/opinions/view_opinion.asp. See also the GPPB Manual of Procedures for the
ProcurementofGoodsandServices.
45Sec.71oftheInstructiontoBiddersprovidesthat"ThebiddershallspecifyinitsBidallportionsofthe

Goods and Services that will be subcontracted, if any, including the entities to whom each portion will be
subcontractedxxx.SubcontractingofanyportionshallnotrelievetheBidderfromanyliabilityorobligation
thatmayarisefromitsperformance."
46Supraat32.
47Memorandum,pp.3235.
48Angelesv.Santos,64Phil.697(1937).
49OngYong,etal.v.DavidTui,etal.,G.R.No.144476,April8,2003.
50Item2.2.6.2.2.2.
51Item2.2.6.1.2.3.
52Item2.2.6.1.2.5.
53Annex9,Commentofpublicrespondent.
54Id.,p.2.
55Annex10,Commentofpublicrespondent.
56OmnibusSBACResolutionNo.09001,Annex6,Commentofpublicrespondent.

57Id..
58Item2.2.6.1.2.5,RFP.
59Supraat48.
60ArticleIXC,Sec.2,par.1.
61ArticleIXC,Sec.2,par.3.
62Underthecontract,thetermPROVIDERreferstoSmartmaticTIMCorporation.
63Memorandum,pp.1729,4952.
64Section26ofRA8436reads:

Sec.26.SupervisionandcontrolTheSystemshallbeundertheexclusivesupervisionandcontrol
oftheCommission.Forthispurpose,thereisherebycreatedaninformationtechnologydepartment
intheCommissiontocarryoutthefulladministrationandimplementationoftheSystem.
The Commission shall take immediate steps as may be necessary for the acquisition, installation,
administration, storage, and maintenance of equipment and devices, and to promulgate the
necessaryrulesandregulationsfortheeffectiveimplementationofthisAct.
65Section1,RA9369.
66Sec.26,RA8436.
67UnderRA9369,theAdvisoryCouncilshallbecomposedofthefollowing:

Sec.8.xxxxxxTheCouncilshallbecomposedofthefollowingmembers,whomustberegistered
Filipinovoters,ofknownindependence,competenceandprobity
"(a)TheChairmanoftheCommissiononinformationandCommunicationsTechnology(CICT)who
shallactasthechairmanofthecouncil
"(b)OnememberfromtheDepartmentofScienceandTechnology
"(c)OnememberfromtheDepartmentofEducation
"(d)Onememberrepresentingtheacademe,tobeselectedbythechairoftheAdvisoryCouncilfrom
amongthelistofnomineessubmittedbythecountry'sacademicinstitutions
"(e) Three members representing ICT professional organizations to be selected by the chair of the
Advisory Council from among the list of nominees submitted by Philippinesbased ICT professional
organization.Nomineesshallbeindividuals,atleastoneofwhomshallbeexperienceinmanagingor
implementinglargescaleITprojects.
"(f) Two members representing nongovernmental electoral reform organizations, to be selected by
the chair of the Advisory Council from among the list of nominees submitted by the country's
nongovernmentalelectoralreformorganizations.
68Sec.9.
69Sec.11.
70Sec.6.3.6.
71Articles3.1.a,3.1.band3.2ofthecontract.
72Memorandum,pp.
73Memorandum,pp.1729,4952.
74SeeZuniPublicSchoolDistrictNo.89,etal.v.DepartmentofEducation,etal.,550U.S.__(2007).

75Sec.9,RA9369.
TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation

DISSENTINGOPINION
BRION,J.:
I write this Dissent mindful that a new system of exercising the constitutional right of suffrage is upon us.
Automatedelection,firsttestedintheARMMelectiononAugust11,2008,shallsoonerorlaterbeappliedatthe
nationallevel.Thedevelopment,tobesure,isachangethatweshouldwelcomeforthepromisesitbringsa
peaceful,clean,orderly,fair,honest,efficient,andcredibleelection.Thefulfillmentofthispromise,however,isnot
aresultthatwecansimplywishintoournationallife.Norisitsomethingwecanattaininahurry.Fulfillmentisa
resultthatthewholecountrymustplan,work,andsacrificefor.
InterfaceofPowers:COMELECandtheSupremeCourt
Attheforefrontinthenationalefforttoachieveacomputerizedelectionsystemis,ofcourse,theCommissionon
Elections(COMELEC)theindependentconstitutionalbodytaskedwiththeenforcementandadministrationofall
electionlawsandregulations.TheSupremeCourt,asthecourtoflastresorttaskedtoguardtheConstitutionand
our laws through interpretation and adjudication of judiciable controversies, is an indispensable partner and
participant in this endeavor, as the Constitution itself safeguards and regulates our electoral processes and
policies, which are expressed through laws and COMELEC regulations. In fact, about five years ago, this Court
decisively spoke on the matter of automation when we invalidated the "Mega Pacific Contract" between the
COMELECandMegaPacificConsortiumfortheautomationoftheMay10,2004elections.1
Once again, we are called upon today with the daunting task of passing upon the validity of another election
automation contract, this time between the COMELEC and Smartmatic International Corporation Total
Information Management Corporation (SMARTMATICTIM) for the coming May 10, 2010 elections.2 In
undertaking this task, I duly acknowledge that the COMELEC exercises considerable latitude and the widest
discretioninadoptingitschosenmeansandmethodsofdischargingitstasks,particularlyinitsbroadpower"to
enforce and administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of an election, plebiscite, initiative,
referendum and recall."3 The Court has interpreted this provision to mean the grant to "COMELEC [of] all the
necessary and incidental powers for it to achieve the objective of holding free, orderly, honest, peaceful and
credibleelections"4anexpansiveviewofCOMELECpowersthatisnotatallnovel.For,asearlyas1941under
the1935Constitution,theCourtalreadyemphasizedinSumulongv.COMELEC5that:
The Commission on Elections is a constitutional body. It is intended to play a distinct and important part in our
schemeofgovernment.Inthedischargeofitsfunctions,itshouldnotbehamperedwithrestrictionsthatwouldbe
fullywarrantedinthecaseofalessresponsibleorganization.TheCommissionmayerr,somaythiscourtalso.It
shouldbeallowedconsiderablelatitudeindevisingmeansandmethodsthatwillinsuretheaccomplishmentofthe
greatobjectiveforwhichitwascreatedfree,orderlyandhonestelections.Wemaynotagreefullywithitschoice
of means, but unless these are clearly illegal or constitute gross abuse of discretion, this court should not
interfere.
Politicsisapracticalmatter,andpoliticalquestionsmustbedealtwithrealisticallynotfromthestandpointofpure
theory.TheCommissiononElections,becauseofitsfactfindingfacilities,itscontactswithpoliticalstrategists,and
its knowledge derived from actual experience in dealing with political controversies, is in a peculiarly
advantageouspositiontodecidecomplexpoliticalquestions.[Emphasissupplied]
The automation question now before us, like any other COMELEC administration and enforcement matter, is a
concernthatCOMELECisentitledbylawtohandleonitsownwithoutanyinterferencefromanyoutsideagency,
notevenfromthisCourt,exceptpursuanttotheallocationofpowersthattheConstitutionhasmandated.Inother
words, the COMELEC reigns supreme in determining how automation shall be phased in, how it shall affect all
aspects of our electoral exercise, and how it shall operate, subject only to our intervention when our own
constitutionaldutycallsforenforcement.Specifically,wecannotcloseoureyeswhenagraveabuseofdiscretion
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction has been committed, such as when the COMELEC acts outside the
contemplationoftheConstitutionandofthelaw.6
Consistentwiththisview,IdonotaimtoquestionthebiddingtheCOMELECundertookanditscompliancewith
ourautomationlawsRepublicAct(RA)Nos.84367and93698intheabsenceofanyviolationsufficientlygross
to amount to the proscribed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. My focus,
rather, is on the gut issues that really strike at the heart of the right of suffrage and place the integrity of our

electoralprocessatrisk.
ThePilotTestingIssue
Forone,IdonotquestiontheCOMELECspresentautomationmovesforlackofpriorpilottestingapointthat
has generated a lot of comment from both the ponencia and the separate opinions. I believe that raising a
questiononthispointismisplacedbecausethedisputedprovisionSection5ofRANo.8436asamended9
doesnotcategoricallyandexpresslydemandapilottestand,infact,doesnotevenmentiontheterm"pilottest."
As worded, this provision should be read in the context of its title "Authority to Use an Automated Election
System." Thus, the provision is essentially a grant of authority to automate, with the automation being a limited
oneintheelectionimmediatelyfollowingthelawspassageandonlygoingnationwideinthe"succeedingregular
nationalorlocalelections."Apilottestisnotanabsolutenecessitybecauseitwasneverimposedasacondition
sine qua non to a nationwide automation Section 5 merely expressed a limit on the extent of automation that
couldtakeplaceintheelectionfollowingthepassageofRANo.9369theautomatedelectionmustbepartialand
local. The COMELEC first exercised its authority to partially automate in the ARMM election held on August 11,
2008, so that this automated electoral exercise was effectively the "pilot exercise" the country embarked on in
electoral automation. It can very well be, as the COMELC posits, the pilot test that Section 5, RA No. 8436, as
amended,mentioned.
Strictlyspeaking,theuseofautomationforthefirsttimeintheARMMelectionwasnotaviolationofthelimitation
thatSection5imposed,becausetheautomationwasproperlylocalandpartial.Iftherehadbeenaviolationatall,
theviolationwasinthefailuretouseautomationinthenextfollowingelectionafterthepassageofRANo.9369
(in the 2007 national and local elections) and in the failure to strictly follow the terms of Section 5 in the first
automated election, because the automated election took place only in portions of Mindanao. These violations,
however, pertained to that first use of automation in the ARMM election, or, if at all, to the failure to use
automation in the 2007 elections. They need not affect the automation for the May 10, 2010 election, whose
budgetforanationallyimplementedautomatedelectionCongressspecificallyprovidedfordespiteknowledgethat
noautomationtookplaceinthe2007electionasoriginallyenvisioned.10Fromthisperspective,pilottestingisan
issuethatdoesnotneedtotriggertheCourtscertioraripowersinvokedinthepresentpetition.11
TheAbdicationIssue
Despite the above conclusion, I still take exception to the present implementation of election automation, as it
involvesanothermorefundamentalviolation:theCOMELEC,contrarytotheConstitutionandthelaw,nowshares
automationresponsibilitieswithSMARTMATICTIMundertheirAutomationContract.Inmyview,thisisaviolation
that transgresses the Constitution, at the same time that it is an action plainly outside the contemplation of the
law.Basedonthischaracterization,thissharingofresponsibilityoverautomationisagraveabuseofdiscretionon
thepartoftheCOMELECthatcallsfortheactiveinterventionofthisCourt,pursuanttothesecondparagraphof
Section1,ArticleVIIIoftheConstitution.12
ItakethisviewinlightofSection2,ArticleIXCoftheConstitutionthatcommandsthe"COMELECtoenforceand
administeralllawsandregulationsrelativetotheconductofanelection"andtherebygivestheCOMELECsole
authority to undertake enforcement and administrative actions in the conduct of elections. In the context of the
presentcase,thisconstitutionalmandatenecessarilyextendstotheenforcementofSection26ofRANo.843613
whichstatesinfull:
Section 26. Supervision and control. The System shall be under the exclusive supervision and control of the
Commission.Forthispurpose,thereisherebycreatedaninformationtechnologydepartmentintheCommission
tocarryoutthefulladministrationandimplementationoftheSystem.
TheCommissionshalltakeimmediatestepsasmaybenecessaryfortheacquisition,installation,administration,
storageandmaintenanceofequipmentanddevices,andtopromulgatethenecessaryrulesandregulationsfor
theeffectiveimplementationofthisAct.[Emphasissupplied]
Ratherthantheexclusivesupervisionandcontrolthatthisprovisionenvisions,theCOMELECeffectivelyshares
responsibilitieswithSMARTMATICTIMintheautomatedMay10,2010electionsbygivingcompletecontrolofthe
technicalaspectsofthiselectiontoaprivateentitySMARTMATICTIM.Inthewordsofthepetition,thiswasan
"abdication" of the COMELECs constitutional mandate, evidenced by the terms of Articles 3.3, 6.7 and 7.4 of
the Automation Contract and by the grant to SMARTMATICTIM of the public and private keys to the voting
equipment.
ThePonenciaandtheIssueofAbdication
Inaddressingtheissue,theponenciastrangelyusesthesameArticlescitedaboveinarguingthatCOMELECdid
notrelinquishitscontroloverthetechnicalaspectoftheAutomatedElectionSystem(AES).ItassertsthatArticle
3.3oftheAutomationContract14(whichdesignatesSMARTMATICTIMasthejointventurepartnerinchargeof

thetechnicalaspectofthecountingandcanvassingsoftwareandhardwareincludingtransmissionconfiguration
andsystemintegration)doesnottranslatetocedingcontroloftheelectoralprocesstoSMARTMATICTIM.Tothe
ponencia,SMARTMATICTIMsdesignatedroleissimplyaneligibilityrequirementimposedonbiddersoperating
under a joint venture.15 The ponencia also supports this view by referring to the Request for Proposals (RFP)
whosenoticeisforbidsfroma"completesolutionsproviderwhichcanprovideexperiencedandeffectiveoverall
nationwideprojectmanagementserviceandtotalcustomersupportunderCOMELECsupervisionandcontrolto
ensuretheeffectiveandsuccessfulimplementationoftheProject."16
TheponenciafurtherpointstoArticle6.7oftheAutomationContractwhichprovides:
6.7 Subject to the provisions of the General Instructions to be issued by the Commission En Banc, the entire
processes of voting, counting, transmission, consolidation and canvassing of votes shall be conducted by
COMELECs personnel and officials, and their performance, completion and final results according to
specifications and within the specified periods shall be the shared responsibility of COMELEC and PROVIDER.
[Emphasissupplied]
Totheponencia,thisprovisionapparentlyspeaksforitselfasitrequiresactionbyCOMELECsownpersonnel.
TheponenciaalsofoundthepetitionersallegationthatSMARTMATICTIMhascontroloverthepublicandprivate
keys necessary to operate the Precinct Count Optical Scan (PCOS) machines to be speculative and without
factual basis. Instead, it agreed with the opinion of the National Computer Center that the "nowhere in the
RFP/TORwasitindicatedthattheCOMELECwoulddelegateto[SMARTMATICTIM]fulldiscretion,supervision
andcontroloverthe[publicandprivatekeys]."
RefutationofthePonenciasPositions
a.EffectofAutomation
In my view, the ponencia has taken the above positions because it viewed the cited Articles in
isolationandreallydidnottakeintoaccountthewholeelectionprocessandtheeffectofautomation
on this process. Be it remembered that an election entails an extended process that starts even
beforeactualvotingbeginswhenvotersregister.Votingitselfisonlyapartoftheprocess,asthisis
followedbythecountingofthevotesbytheBoardofElectionInspectors(BEI),thecanvassingofthe
talliedvotesbytheBoardofCanvassers(BOC),thetransmissionandconsolidationofthecanvassed
results to the municipal, provincial and a national BOC, and finally the announcement and
proclamationofthewinners.Trueenough,thepeopleundertakingalltheseactivities,particularlyin
the traditional voting process, have been COMELEC officials, employees, and duly deputized
governmentpersonnel.Thisconsideration,however,isnotenoughinpassingupontheCOMELEC
SMARTMATICTIMarrangementundertheAutomationContract.
b.ThePonenciasOmissions
What the ponencia did not sufficiently explain is the COMELECs intent to introduce a new way of
voting17 that affects. not only on the act of casting votes, but also the whole manner by which the
countingandcanvassingofvotes,thetransmissionandcollationofresults,andtheproclamationof
winners are to be undertaken. All these are reflected in detail in the RFP, heretofore mentioned,
whose call was for a "complete systems provider, and not just a vendor, which can provide
experiencedandeffectiveoverallnationwideprojectmanagementserviceandtotalcustomersupport
(covering all areas of project implementation including technical support, training, information,
campaign support, civil and electrical works service, warehousing, deployment, installation and
pullout, contingency planning, etc.) under COMELEC supervision and control"18 All these
automation activities are intrusions into the traditional COMELEC domain and cannot be simply
glossedover.
The ponencia likewise failed to mention that Section 26 of RA No. 8436 categorically required that
the AES to be installed shall be under COMELECs exclusive supervision and control for this
purpose, the law created an Information Technology Department (ITD) within the COMELEC to
carryoutthefulladministrationandimplementationofthesystem.UnderlyingtheCOMELECs
mandateofexclusivesupervisionandcontrolovertheAESinSection26istheadoptionofmeasures
forthe"acquisition,installation,administration,storageandmaintenanceofequipmentanddevices
andthepromulgationofthenecessaryrulesandregulationsfortheeffectiveimplementationofRA
No.8436."
c.Section26ofRANo.8436
UnderSection26,themandateofthelawiscleartheoperativewordusedis"exclusive," which

means that the automation responsibility given to the COMELEC cannot be shared with any other
entity.Specifically,itmeansthattheCOMELEC,throughitsITD,shallhavefullandexclusivecontrol
over the entire process of voting, counting, transmission, consolidation and canvassing of votes,
including their performance and completion and the final results. No special interpretative skill is
necessarytoappreciatethemeaningof"exclusive.""Supervisionandcontrol,"ontheotherhand,are
terms that have practically attained technical legal meaning from jurisprudence.19 "Control" as the
established cases signify means to exercise restraining or directing influence over to dominate,
regulatehence,toholdfromactiontocurbtosubjectalsotooverpower.20Inanyinterpretationof
Section26,thesearekeytermsandthestandardsthatshouldpredominateindeterminingwhether
this Section has been complied with. The ponencia, unfortunately does not appear to have
consideredthisSectionatall.
d.TheInformationTechnologyDepartment
Giventhebiddingtermsandthequalificationimposedonthe"completesystemsprovider,"whatthe
ITDremainedtodoafterthesystemsproviderisinplacebecomesapuzzlewhoseelusiveansweris
nowheretobefoundinthelawsandtheregulationsinplace.Presumably,theITDcanstillcouchits
functions in terms of the "supervision and control" that Section 26 commands and which the
COMELEC specified in the RFP. This intent, however, cannot be simply manifested in the law and
parrotedintheRFPasproofthattherehadbeencompliancesuchcompliancemustbeshownand
muststandthetestofovertacts,particularlycontemporaneousactstheCOMELECanditssystems
provider undertake in furtherance of the intended automation. The best evidence of this intent, of
course, is the contract that defines the parties respective roles in the automation. The contractual
termsarelikewisethebestevidenceofwhethertheresponsibilityforautomationisexclusive,asthe
citedSection26requires.
e.TheAutomationContractExamined
The Automation Contract between the COMELEC and SMARTMATICTIM, executed on July 10,
2009, fully defines the automation "project" to be undertaken. It delineates as well the roles the
partiesshallrespectivelyundertakeinpursuingtheproject,andtheexpectationsthateachpartyhas
fromtheother.
The "project" is defined as "the COMELECs nationwide automation of the voting, counting,
transmission,consolidationandcanvassingofvotesfortheMay10,2010SynchronizedNationaland
Local Elections, consisting of the three (3) components mentioned in the Bidding Documents (the
RFP)".21Thethreecomponentsare:22
ComponentI:PaperbasedAutomatedElectionSystem(AES)
1A.ElectionManagementSystem(EMS)
1B.PrecintCountOpticalScan(PCOSSystem)
1CConsolidation/CanvassingSystem(CCS)
Component2:ProvisionforElectronicTransmissionofElectionResults,usingPublic
TelecommunicationsNetwork.
Component3:OverallProjectManagement.
SMARTMATICTIM,astheserviceprovider,hastheobligationtoprovidethegoodstheprojectshall
require, generally described in the contract as all the materials necessary to carry out the project,"
except the ballot boxes.23 It shall likewise provide the services defined as "all the acts to be
performed or provided by the PROVIDER [SMARTMATICTIM] to COMELEC for the operation and
completionoftheProject."24
Under Article 3.2, "[t]he provider shall provide the Goods and perform the Services under this
Contract and the Contract Documents. It shall provide competent project management, technical
manpower and efficient services. It shall ensure the proper, satisfactory and timely execution and
completion of the Project." This is complemented by Article 3.3 whose second paragraph in turn
states that "[SMARTMATICTIM], as the joint venture partner with the greater track record in
automatedelections,shallbeinchargeofthetechnicalaspectsofthecountingandcanvassing
software and hardware, including transmission, configuration and system integration.
[SMARTMATICTIM]shallalsobeprimarilyresponsibleforpreventingandtroubleshootingtechnical
problemsthatmayariseduringtheelection."

The COMELEC, for its part, bound itself to pay under the terms of the contract, and shall be
responsible,amongothers,for:
6.3.2.CloselycoordinatingwiththePROVIDERinthepreparationoftheSitesandsetupthe
hardware,networkinstallation,softwareinstallation,usertestingandtraining.Fortheduration
oftheProject,COMELECshallprovidecontinuingassistancetothePROVIDERontheneeds
oftheProject.
6.3.6. Creating its own Project Team called the Project Management Office (PMO) for the
purpose, among others, of overseeing the Projects execution and implementation. It shall
allowthePROVIDERaccesstoconcernedorresponsibleCOMELECofficials.25
As heretofore mentioned, Article 6.7 of the Automation Contract provides for the conduct by the
COMELEC personnel and officials of the entire electoral process, but their performance,
completion and final results, according to specifications and within the specified periods,
shallbethesharedresponsibilityofCOMELECandthePROVIDER.26Article7.4providesthat"
[u]pondeliveryoftheGoods,inwholeorinpart,tothewarehousesasapprovedbyCOMELEC,the
Equipmentshallbeunderthecustody,responsibilityandcontrolofthePROVIDER."27
Interestingly, the contract does not even mention the COMELECs ITD and how it will interact with
SMARTMATICTIM in the implementation of the project. The Project Management Office (PMO) is
specifically mentioned, but only for the purpose of overseeing the projects execution and
implementation it is not considered as an office with authority to speak on technical matters. On
technicalmatters,SMARTMATICTIMreignssupremeandtheITDisnotevenmentioned.Underthis
situation, the PMO cannot but merely be a monitoring or liaison office, rather than an office
supervisingorcontrollingtheprojectforCOMELEC.ItcannotsuperviseandcontrolifSMARTMATIC
TIMhasthelastsayontechnicalmatters.Infact,theCOMELECitself,underArticle6.3.2,onlyplays
anassistingroletoSMARTMATICTIM,thusraisingthedirectimplicationthatthelatterhasthelead
roleinalltechnicalactivitiesthisArticlementions.Thusviewed,canthePMOraiseanyhigherthan
theCOMELEC?
f.TheSharedResponsibility
BasedonalltheseconsiderationsdrawnfromtheRFPandtheAutomationContract,Icannotescape
theconclusionthatwhatexistsisnottheexclusivesupervisionandcontroloftheautomationprocess
bytheCOMLEC,butasharedresponsibilitybetweenthecontractingpartiestoachievethisend.To
pointouttheobvious,SMARTMATICTIMtakescareofprojectmanagement,withthePMOrelegated
totheblurryroleof"overseeingtheProjectsexecutionandimplementation"andwithnootherclearly
definedroleintheautomationproject.ITDdoesnotevenexistinsofarastheprojectdocumentsare
concerned. Thus, while the COMELEC retains its traditional role with respect to the running of the
electionitself,anewelectionprocessisinplacethatissubstantiallyaffectedbyautomation.Stated
otherwise, while the COMELEC truly controls the BEI, the BOC, and the administrative and
adjudicativestaffattendingtotheelectionprocess,thevotersthemselves,andeventheBEIandthe
BOC,mustyieldtotheprocessthatautomationcallsfor,whichprocessisessentiallytechnicalandis
inthehandsofSMARTMATICTIM,theproviderwhowhollysuppliesthehardwareandthesoftware
that controls the voting, counting, canvassing, consolidation and transmission of results, and who
expressly has control and custody over the election equipment to be used in the voting, with no
reservepowerwhatsoeveronthepartoftheCOMELECinthisregard.28Nottobeforgottenisthat
SMARTMATICTIM also provides the necessary services that run across voting, counting,
canvassing,consolidationandtransmissionactivities.
These arrangements, viewed from all sides, does not indicate an exclusive supervision and control
situationovertheautomationprocess.Tobeexact,theyinvolvesharedresponsibilitiesthat,however
practicaltheymaybefromthebusinessandtechnicalperspectives,arearrangementsthatPhilippine
lawdoesnotallow.
AccessKeysandDigitalSignatures
Separatelyfromalltheseconsiderationsisthematteroftheaccesskeysanddigitalsignaturesthat
are objectionable, not merely because of the intrusion in the technical end of automation, but
becausetheyeffectivelyhandovercontroloftheelectionprocesstoSMARTMATICTIM.
Contrary to the ponencias findings, a close perusal of the automation contracts supporting
documentsindicatethattheCOMELEChasinfacteffectivelyhandedovertoSMARTMATICcontrol
overtheAES,particularlywithrespecttothefollowingquotedtechnicalaspects:

a. Generate and distribute the access keys for the canvassing equipment and 82,200 optical
scannerstobeusedonelectionday29
b.Deliverthe82,200opticalscannerstotheirdesignatedprecinctsandsecurethemonsite30
c. Prepare the polling places and canvassing centers in all levels to make them fully
functional31and
d.Maintain100%electronictransmissioncapabilityonelectionday(SMARTMATICTIMtofill
the25%gapofthecountryscurrent75%networkcoverage)[Emphasissupplied]
The access keys are significant because control and possession of these keys translate to the
capacitytochangeelectionresultsinanyprecinctinthecountry.Thisconclusioncanbedrawnfrom
thefollowingexchangesduringtheoralarguments:
ASSOCIATEJUSTICECARPIO:NowwhatisthefirstfunctionoftheCommissiononElectionsunder
theConstitution?
ATTY.ROQUE:Well,tosupervisetheconductofelections,YourHonor.
xxxxxxxxx
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: In short, the Constitution mandates that the COMELEC must have
controlovertheelectionprocess?
ATTY.ROQUE:Yes,YourHonor.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: Okay. Who has possession of the public and private keys of this
automationprogram.
ATTY.ROQUE:Smartmatic,YourHonor.
xxxxxxxxx
ASSOCIATEJUSTICECARPIO:Wouldyouknowhowthesepublicandprivatekeysaregenerated?
xxxxxxxxx
ATTY.ROQUE:Yes,YourHonor.ItisalsoSmartmaticthatwouldgeneratethat.
xxxxxxxxx
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: Okay. The private keys refer to the keys given to BEI members,
correct?
ATTY.ROQUE:Yes,YourHonor.
ASSOCIATEJUSTICECARPIO:IsthisgeneratedbytheBEImemberorgiventothem?
ATTY.ROQUE:Giventothem,YourHonor.
xxxxxxxxx
ASSOCIATEJUSTICECARPIO:Okay.Butinthiscase,theBEImemberswillnotgeneratetheirown
password,theywillbegiventhepassword,thekey,theprivatekeybytheSmartmaticpeople?
ATTY.ROQUE:Yes,YourHonor,becauseasexplainedbyProfessorManalastas,theywillhavetobe
digitalsignaturestobeprovidedbySmartmatic.
ASSOCIATEJUSTICECARPIO:Andthepublickeyswhyarethepublickeysimportant?
ATTY.ROQUE:Well,YourHonor,becauseunlessyouhaveIthastobecongruencebetweenthe
private and public key before you can have access to the system, Your Honor. It works as if it is a
functionalequivalentoftwokeys,YourHonor.Thatmustbeusedtogether,otherwise,itcannotenter.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: And the public keys will not be known to the BEI but will only be
knowntothe(interrupted)
ATTY.ROQUE:Smartmatic,YourHonor.

xxxxxxxxx
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: Okay. So the public and private keys will be generated by the
Smartmatic and they will be in control of this, they can change it anytime, and that gives them the
powertochangetheresultsofanyprecinct,correct?
ATTY.ROQUE:Yes,YourHonor.
ASSOCIATEJUSTICECARPIO:Sotheycontroltheelectionprocess?
ATTY.ROQUE:Yes,YourHonor.[Emphasissupplied]32
Bid Bulletin No. 10 issued by COMELECSBAC on April 15, 2009 confirms the correctness of what
theaboveexchangediscussed.ThisBulletinstates,amongothers,thatthe"digitalsignatureshallbe
assigned by the winning bidder [SMARTMATICTIM in the present case] to all members of the BEI
and BOC. It further states that "for [National Board of Canvassers or NBOC], the digital signatures
shall be assigned to all members of the Commission and to the Senate President and the House
Speaker." These terms are all consistent with Article 3.3 of the Automation Contract, heretofore
mentioned,whichallowsSMARTMATICTIMtobe"inchargeofthetechnicalaspectsofthecounting
andcanvassingsoftwareandhardware,includingtransmissionconfigurationandsystemintegration."
Onthispoint,thefollowingoralargumentexchangesareilluminating,viz:
ASSOCIATEJUSTICECARPIO:AreyoufamiliarwithBidBulletinNo.10issuedonApril15,2009of
theCOMELECsBACCommittee?
ATTY. ROQUE: Well, offhand, Your Honor, I cannot recall Bid Bulletin No. 10, and I do not have a
copyofBulletinNo.10.
ASSOCIATEJUSTICECARPIO:Okay.IwillreadtoyouBidBulletinNo.10issuedbytheCOMELEC
datedApril15.ThisisfromthewebsiteofthePCIJ.
ATTY.ROQUE:Yes,YourHonor.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: The digital I am quoting now: "The digital signature should be
assigned by the winning bidder to all members of the BEI and BOC. The digital signature shall be
issuedbyaCertificateAuthoritynominatedbythewinningbidderandapprovedbytheCOMELEC."
In other words, SMARTMATIC, the winning bidder, will nominate DERISIGN to be the Certification
Authority, just ask COMELEC for approval and COMELEC will say "approved." From then on, it is
SMARTMATICthatwilldealwithDERISGINonthegenerationofthepublicandprivatekeys.
ATTY.ROQUE:Thatiscorrect,YourHonor.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: So, control of the public and private keys are in the hands of
SMARTMATIC.Now,whatshouldtheCOMELECdotoregaincontroloftheelectionprocess?
ATTY.ROQUE:Well,wedonotknow,YourHonor,becauseasfarasDERISIGNisconcerned,they
willnotdealwiththeCOMELEC,YourHonor.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: Yes, but COMELEC should recall this and say we will deal with
DERISIGN on generation of the public and private keys and we will hold exclusive possession and
control we will not share these public and private keys with SMARTMATICTIM or with anybody
becausewhoeverisinpossessionofthesekeyscanchangetheresultsoftheelection,correct?
ATTY.ROQUE:Thatispossible,YourHonor.Yes.Infact,thatiswhatCOMELECshoulddo.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: So, it is not enough that COMELEC should have copossession of
the keys. They must have sole and exclusive possession of those public and private keys because
theConstitutionvestsintheCOMELECalonecontroloftheelectoralprocess,correct?
ATTY.ROQUE:Absolutely,YourHonor.[Emphasissupplied]33
Anotedexpertincomputerscience,ProfessorPabloManalastasoftheAteneodeManilaUniversity
Computer Science Department and the University of the Philippines Department of Computer
Scienceexplainsthesignificanceoftheprivatekeysinrelationtothedigitalsignaturestobeprovided
bySMARTMATICTIMthus:
TherealkeytothesanctityoftheballotistheprivatekeystobeissuedbytheBEI.Unfortunately,the

privatekeyisnotprivateatall.Aftercollationofvotes,theBEIsealsitstallywithadigitalsignature
usingprivatekeysbeforetransmittingtheresults.Thesedigitalsignatureswouldbegeneratedand
assignedbySMARTMATICandorgroupsauthorizedbyit.SMARTMATICwouldhavepossessionof
thesecretandthepublickeysofallBEIpersonnel.Thepersoninpossessionofthesecretkeycan
changethevoteoftheprecinct.34
ThedigitalsignaturesarecrucialsinceSection22oftheRANo.8436asamendedprovidesthat"the
electionreturnstransmittedelectronicallyanddigitallysignedshallbeconsideredasofficialelection
results and shall be used as the basis for the canvassing of votes and the proclamation of a
candidate."35Thus,byplacingsolelyinthehandsofSMARTMATICTIMthediscretiontoassignthe
"digitalsignatures,"theCOMELEChaseffectivelysurrenderedcontroloftheMay10,2010elections
and violated its constitutional mandate to administer the conduct of elections in the country.
Significantly, even the counsel for SMARTMATICTIM admitted during the oral arguments that the
COMELECshouldnothavegiventoSMARTMATICTIMthepossessionandcontrolofthepublicand
privatekeys,thus:
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: Okay, let us go [to] the public and private public keys, you were
sayingthatCOMELECifitwantscanhaveexclusivepossessionandcontrolofthepublicandprivate
keys,isthatright?
ATTY.LAZATIN:Thatiscorrect,YourHonor.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: And it will not be a problem for SMARTMATIC in performing its
obligationsunderthecontract,thatisright?
ATTY.LAZATIN:Thatiscorrect,YourHonor.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: So, it is the choice of COMELEC if they want to have sole and
exclusivepossessionofthepublicandprivatekeys?
ATTY.LAZATIN:WeevenbelieveYourHonorthattheCOMELEChasnochoicebecauseitistheone
conductingtheelections.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: So, it should not have given to SMARTMATIC possession and
controlofthepublicandprivatekeys?
ATTY.LAZATIN:Yes,YourHonor.
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE CARPIO: So, you agree with me that it should be given back solely to
COMELECbecausethatistheeffectivecontrolovertheautomationprocess?
ATTY.LAZATIN:Thatiscorrectuntilaftertheelection,YourHonor,Iwouldliketostressthatthisisa
leastarrangementYourHonorsothattheelectronickeywillhavetobereturnedtothelessor,Your
Honor.
ASSOCIATEJUSTICECARPIO:No,Iamnottalkingabouttheelectronickey,Iamtalkingaboutthe
digitalsignatures.
ATTY.LAZATIN:Agreed,YourHonor.
ASSOCIATEJUSTICECARPIO:Okay,youagreethatitbelongs,itshouldbeunderthepossession
andcontrolofCOMELEC?
ATTY.LAZATIN:Thatiscorrect,YourHonor.36
CONCLUSIONS
Section26clearlyprovidesthattheITDshallhaveexclusivesupervisionandcontroloftheAESandshallcarry
out the full administration and implementation of the system. To fully implement this statutory requirement, the
COMELECshouldhavestipulatedintheautomationcontractthatitistheITD,andnotSMARTMATICTIM,that
shouldbemadeinchargeofthetechnicalaspectsoftheautomatedMay10,2010elections,consistentwithits
constitutional mandate as well as Section 26 of RA No. 8436. Under the present contract, the exclusive
supervisionandcontrolovertheAESthatthelawinitswisdomhasputinplace,hassimplybeennegated.
TobewaryofgivingcontrolofthecriticalelementsofourelectionprocesstoanentityotherthantheCOMELEC
cannotandshouldnotberegardedasanunhealthyskepticismthatweshouldshyawayfrom.Onthecontrary,
warinessshouldbeourmindset,particularlyonlegalmattersbearingonelectionsandtheirautomation,giventhe

constitutionalandlegalguidelinesthatfoistonusthestandardofafair,clean,honestandcredibleelection.We
must be wary, too, because we are not wanting in warnings from those who have waded ahead of us into the
waters of automation. As observed in foreign jurisdictions with previous experience in the use of automated
systems:37
The particular danger in computercontrolled voting machines was said to lie in the fact that elections could be
muchmoreeffectivelyinfluencedviamanipulationofthesoftwarebythedevicemanufacturerthaninballotbox
elections.Forinstance,itwassaidtobepossibleforfaultysoftwaretoallotacertainshareofthevotescasttoa
certain party regardless of the election decision by the respective voter or for the total votes cast to be divided
amongthepartiesstandingforelectionaccordingtoasetproportion.Manipulationsweresaidtobepossibleboth
bypoliticallyorfinanciallymotivated"insiders",inparticularemployeesofthemanufacturer,andbyexternalthird
partieswhogainedaccesstothecomputersusedbythemanufacturer(forinstanceviavirusesortrojans)they
weresaidwithregardtothecomplexityofthesoftwareusednotalwaystobediscoveredevenincarefulquality
controleffectedbythemanufacturer.Althoughitwassaidtobenecessarytopreventunauthorisedaccesstothe
devicesbetweentheelectionsthroughsuitablesecuritymeasures,nosuchmonitoringwassaidtotakeplacein
Germany there were also said to be no suitable regulations in force that were able to guarantee protected
storageofthevotingmachines.38
Broad as the power of the COMELEC may be as the independent constitutional body tasked to enforce and
administer all laws and regulations relative to the conduct of elections, it has no competence to act outside the
Constitutionanditssupportingstatutes39thescopeofitsactivitiesiscircumscribedbyourelectionlawsandby
theConstitution.40Thus,whileweaccordthegreatestrespecttothemeansadoptedbytheCOMELECtoresolve
policy questions on the conduct and regulation of elections and give its actions the greatest presumption of
regularity, we must not hesitate to declare its actions grossly abusive of its constitutionallygranted discretion
whenitactsoutsidethecontemplationoftheConstitutionandofourlaws.41Insayingthis,Ihavetoharkbackto
whereIstartedinthisDissent.Iamnotagainstandwouldwelcomeautomationundertakenwithinthelegaland
constitutional limits. Consequently, while I vote to strike down automation contract between COMELEC and
SMARTMATICTIM as invalid for violating Section 2, Article IX (C) of the Constitution and Section 26 of RA No.
8436,asamendedbyRANo.9369,Iwouldnothesitatetoacceptanautomationarrangementwithoutthelegally
objectionablefeaturesifCOMELECcanstillworkthisoutforpartialorevennationalimplementationintheMay
10,2010elections.
Accordingly,Idissentfromthemajorityopinion.
ARTUROD.BRION
AssociateJustice

Footnotes
1 See Information Technology Foundation of the Philippines v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 15939, January 13,

2004,419SCRA141.
2ContractfortheProvisionofAnAutomatedElectionSystemfortheMay10,2010SynchronizedNational

andLocalElectionsdatedJuly10,2009(AutomationContract).
3CONSTITUTION,ArticleIX(C)Section2(1).
4Loongv.COMELEC,G.R.No.133676,April14,1999,305SCRA832,870871.
573Phil.288,295296(1941).
6CONSTITUTION,ArticleVIII,Section1.Seealsosupranote4.
7AnActAuthorizingTheCommissionOnElectionsToUseAnAutomatedElectionSystemInTheMay11,

1998 National Or Local Elections And In Subsequent National and Local Electoral Exercises, Providing
FundsThereforandForOtherPurposes.
8AnActAmendingRepublicActNo.8436,Entitled"AnActAuthorizingTheCommissionOnElectionsTo

Use An Automated Election System In The May 11, 1998 National Or Local Elections And In Subsequent
NationalandLocalElectoralExercises,ToEncourageTransparency,Credibility,FairnessandAccuracyof
Elections,AmendingForThePurposeBatasPambansaBlg.881,AsAmended,RepublicActNo.7166And
OtherRelatedElectionLaws,ProvidingFundsThereforandForOtherPurposes."

9SEC.6.Section6ofRepublicActNo.8436isherebyamendedtoreadasfollows:

SEC.5Authority to Use an Automated Election System. To carry out the abovestated policy, the
Commission on Elections, herein referred to as the Commission, is hereby authorized to use an
automated election system or systems in the same election in different provinces, whether paper
basedoradirectrecordingelectronicelectionsystemasitmaydeemappropriateandpracticalfor
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
immediatelyaftereffectivityofthisAct,theAESshallbeusedinatleasttwohighlyurbanizedcities
and two provinces each in Luzon, Visayas and Mindanao, to be chosen by the Commission:
Provided,further,Thatlocalgovernmentunitswhoseofficialshavebeenthesubjectofadministrative
chargeswithinsixteen(16)monthpriortotheMay14,2007electionshallnotbechosen:Provided,
finally,ThatnoareashallbechosenwithouttheconsentoftheSanggunianofthelocalgovernment
unit concerned. The term local government unit as used in this provision shall refer to a highly
urbanized city or province. In succeeding regular national or local elections, the AES shall be
implementednationwide."[Emphasissupplied]
10SeeRepublicActNo.9525entitled"AnActAppropriatingTheSumofElevenBillionThreeHundredOne

MillionSevenHundredNinetyThousandPesos(P11,301,790,000.00)AsSupplementalAppropriationsFor
AnAutomatedElectionSystemandForOtherPurposes.
11 "Section 5 of RA No. 8436 does not state that the use of the AES is necessary or is a condition

precedenttotheconductofautomatedelectionsin2010.Hadthelegislatorsintendedthepilottestingtobe
mandatory, they could have stated the same in a language that is clear and straightforward. xxx. In any
event, the pilot automation in the May 10, 2007 elections, as demanded by petitioners, could not be
compliedwithowingtoitsinnateimpossibility"COMELECsComment,pp.2324.
12Theprovisionpertinentlystates:"Judicialpowerincludesthedutyofthecourtsofjusticetosettleactual

controversiesinvolvingrightswhicharelegallydemandableandenforceable,andtodeterminewhetheror
nottherehasbeenagraveabuseofdiscretionamountingtolackorexcessofjurisdictiononthepartofany
branchorinstrumentalityoftheGovernment."
13NotamendedbyRANo.9436.
14Art.3.3readspertinentlyprovides:

3.3 The PROVIDER shall be liable for all its obligations under this Project and the performance of
portions thereof by other persons or entities not parties to this Contract shall not relieve the
PROVIDERofsaidobligationsandconcomitantliabilities.
SMARTMATIC,asthejointventurepartnerwiththegreatertrackrecordinautomatedelections,shall
be in charge of the technical aspects of the counting and canvassing software and hardware
including transmission configuration and system integration. SMARTMATIC shall also be primarily
responsible for preventing and troubleshooting technical problems that may arise during the
elections.[Emphasissupplied]
15Part5,par.5.4(e)oftheInstructiontoBiddersstates:

5.4.AJVoftwoormorefirmsaspartnersshallcomplywiththefollowingrequirements.
xxx
(e) The JV member with a greater track record in automated elections, shall be in charge of the
technical aspects of the counting and canvassing software and hardware, including transmission,
configurationandsystemintegration.
16ThepertinentportionoftheRFPprovides:

The Commission on Elections (COMELEC), through its Bids and Awards Committee (BAC), is
currentlyacceptingbidsforthelease,withanoptiontopurchase,ofanautomatedelectionsystem
(AES)thatwillmeetthefollowingneeds:
xxx
(6)Acompletesolutionsprovider,andnotjustavendor,whichcanprovideexperiencedandeffective
overall nationwide project management service and total customer support (covering all areas of

project implementation including technical support, training, information campaign support, civil and
electrical works service, warehousing, deployment, installation and pullout, contingency planning,
etc.),underCOMELECsupervisionandcontrol,toensureeffectiveandsuccessfulimplementationof
theProject.[Emphasissupplied]
17SeeRFP,par.1and2atp.5.
18Id.,par.6.
19Mondanov.Silvosa,97Phil.158
20RomanCatholicApostolicAdministratorv.LandRegistrationCommission,102Phil.625.
21AutomationContractatp.1.
22Id.,p.12.
23Id.,p.4.
24Id.,p.45.
25Id.,p.11.
26Id.,p.12.
27Id.,p.13.
28Article3.3oftheAutomationContract.
29BidBulletinNo.10,April27,2009.
30BidBulletinNo.6,April272009,p.7BidBulletinNo.10,April27,2009,p.3.
31BidBulletinNo.19,April27,2009,p.2.
32TSN,OralArgumentsofJuly29,2009,pp.4957.
33TSN,OralArgumentsofJuly29,2009,pp.218221.
34Seehttp://pcij.org/stories/2009/electionautomation2.html,(lastvisitedSeptember10,2009).
35Par.4.5oftheRFPdatedMarch11,2009alsostatesthattheBoardofElectionInspectorsshalldigitally

signandencrypttheinternalcopyoftheelectionreturn.
36TSN,OralArgumentsofJuly29,2009,pp.461463
37In the Judgment dated March 3, 2009, the German Federal Constitutional Court (GFCC) held that the

use of computercontrolled voting machines under the Federal Voting Machines Ordinance was
unconstitutional since it does not ensure that only such voting machines are permitted and used which
meet the constitutional requirements of the principle of the public nature of elections. Accordingly, the
GFCC ruled that the computercontrolled voting machines used in the election of the 16th German
Bundestag did not meet the requirements which the constitution places on the use of electronic voting
machines See Judgment of the Second Senate of 3 March 2009 on the basis of the oral hearing of 28
October
2008,
2
BvC
3/07,
2
BvC
4/07,
http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/entscheidungen/rs20090303_2bvc000307en.html, (last visited
September10,2009)
38Id.
39Dipatuanv.COMELEC,47SCRA258(1972).
40Id.
41Cautonv.COMELEC,19SCRA911(1967).

TheLawphilProjectArellanoLawFoundation