Poll sabotage case filed vs Smartmatic-TIM

PCOS machine. INQUIRER.net FILE PHOTO

The group of former election commissioner Gus Lagman on Thursday filed an electoral sabotage case against officials of technology provider Smartmatic–Total Information Management (TIM) Corporation for allegedly altering the source code of the Precinct Count Optical Scan (PCOS) machines during the May 2013 elections.

The source code is the program of instructions that define how the PCOS machines operate.

In a seven-page Joint Affidavit-Complaint filed at the Commission on Elections (Comelec), Lagman’s group accused Smartmatic officials of violating Republic Act 9369 or the Election Automation Law when it changed the source code just hours after voting closed last May 13, 2013.

“Smartmatic officials/personnel inexplicably changed the scripts of the un-reviewed source code at or about the time of the consolidation/canvassing during the said elections,” said the complaint.

“This action on the part of Smartmatic as well as the Election Management System constitutes the crime of electoral sabotage,” it added.

Lagman cited their busy schedule as the reason whey they filed the complaint only after two years.

“We knew that that happened but it was only now that we realized that they (Smartmatic) can’t do that. Iba din kasi ang focus namin noon e,” Lagman told reporters after filing the complaint at the Comelec Law Department.

Named respondents in the complaint were Smartmatic President for Asia-Pacific Cesar Flores, Albert Castro Rico and Marlon Garcia.

Apart from Lagman, the other complainants were Automated Election System (AES) Watch members Leo Querubin, Maria Corazon Akol, Glenn Chong, Temario Rivera, and Ernesto del Rosario.

The changing of the source code supposedly happened at the Command Center of the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting (PPCRV) about two hours after voting had closed.

They alleged that the alteration came after about 12 million votes for the senatorial elections had been received in the PPCRV transparency server.

The complainants also claimed that such actions went without the required notification of political parties or their representatives as well as other election stakeholders. SFM