There are three things which we need to watch in the coming days and weeks. First, last ditch attempts at charter change. Second, possible administration measures to justify extra constitutional means to perpetuate the status quo and third, eventual outbreak of dissent due to public frustration of a non-election scenario.
This administration should not risk a no election scenario. For the past weeks, there is a noticeable increase of prep activity for the elections. Through this ingenious events, it successfully prepared the public to expect an elections to happen in May 10, 2010. People are desirous already of change next year and to frustrate them would definitely mean big trouble. As I wrote in previous entries, wide-spread aggression is possible if this government frustrates the people's desire for change.
Two signs that lead people to surmise a no-election scenario: one, the failed bidding of the automation of the elections at COMELEC and the charter change deliberations next Tuesday.
Though there may have been legitimate reasons, one fact remains that the bidding failed. COMELEC has until May 30 to come up with a new set of bidders and a new bidding process. They can't allow the previous bidders to re-bid. That's a no-no. If they do that, the entire process will be perceived as tainted and it would definitely affect the entire conduct of the coming elections.
It's already May 14 and is 16 days enough to re-do the bidding? COMELEC should speed it up otherwise, public support for a constitutional means for change would surely crumble and justify an extra-constitutional way out of the Arroyo mess.
While prospects of automation hangs in the balance, Arroyo supporters at the House are expediting charter change. So, both--the COMELEC bidding and charter change--are heading towards one deadly deadline.
If charter change succeeds, they'll be elections anyway, albeit, not presidential, but parliamentary. Yet, if automation fails, and it's back to manual counting, the entire integrity of the whole electoral process is definitely suspect and renders the entire constitutional process void ab initio.
That justifies a term extension that would probably be backed up by a pro-Arroyo military. National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales already suggested this some months ago.
Now, is this is a possibility? Yes. Remember that come 2010, class 1978 will be the dominant player in both the AFP and the PNP. With a pro-Arroyo class as the ascendant class, the possibility of either Martial rule or a term extension is there.
"How shall freedom be defended? By arms when it is attacked by arms; by truth when it is attacked by lies; by democratic faith when it is attacked by authoritarian dogma. Always, and in the final act, by dedication and faith." Archibald MacLeish
ReplyDeleteThe EQualizer
very well said The Equalizer. We shall fight for our freedoms with the force of our Reason and the strength of our collective unity.
ReplyDeleteThe automation of national elections is almost certain to fail. The technological challenges are enormous. Get the bids okayed, get thousands of pieces of equipment in-country, get and test the software on the equipment, certify the accuracy of the system and assure that it is tamper-proof, roll it out to all the polling places, train and certify the operators, have hundreds of standby techicians available in case of problems. One year is not enough time. I have never seen a program in the Philippines that runs in a tight, well-planned and crisply executed way. Things are done on Filipino time, in a non-caring way. Chaos is virtually certain. Sorry to report that.
ReplyDeleteJoe
Definitely take joy in what you've got here, thrilled you're getting it around and what you have to say.
ReplyDeleteYour article was excellently balanced between amusing and intelligent.
I am inspired to swap theory and insight with you. Your website
is unquestionably one of the better blogs out there right now.
My webpage :: n-haus.com