The Commission on Elections (Comelec) on Friday told the Supreme Court (SC) that there is a “strong likelihood” that the upcoming May 9, 2016 elections will fail if the high court will insist on printing receipts to voters after casting their votes.
“There is a strong likelihood that the May 2016 elections will fail if the voting receipt feature is enabled by the Comelec at this very late stage of the project,” read the 13-page motion for reconsideration filed by the Comelec through Solicitor General Florin Hilbay.
READ: SC orders Comelec to issue vote receipts
A motion for reconsideration was filed to reverse the high court’s earlier ruling ordering the poll body to activate the voter verified paper audit trail (VVPAT) feature of the vote counting machines (VCM) so that it can issue receipts to voters come May 9 elections.
The poll body stressed that the use of the VVPAT would result in “additional time of at least two hours and 10 minutes” for all voters to leave the counting machines and longer lines “which may discourage voters from exercising their right of suffrage.”
It also warned that the voting period could be extended to more than 20 hours since the issuance of receipts would require four more additional steps in the polling process—enabling of ambiguous marks screen, enabling of vote review screen, printing and tearing of voting receipt and dropping of the voting receipt into another box, which will be provided by the Comelec apart from the ballot box.
“The hardware and software without a printer/cutter upgrade on the VCMs will not be able to cut the printed receipt automatically, thereby increasing the rate and likelihood of paper jams and printer failures dramatically, as when a voter tears the printed receipt and yanks the existing paper cutter,” the Comelec said.
Besides, it added that printing of voting receipts is merely a surplusage since the best evidence of how voters expressed their intention is the ballot itself.
Comelec said they should be given a “wide leeway in choosing the means to perform its constitutional and statutory duties under the law.”
Comelec, through Hilbay, added that while they understand the interest of the Supreme Court in ensuring transparency of the 2016 elections, “this objective should not result in burning the house down and risking a failure of election, a catastrophic result that is too high a price to pay for the marginal improvement sought by petitioners [former senator Richard Gordon].”
“Progress requires a sense of proportion, balance and timing,” the Solicitor General said.
In the unanimous decision penned by Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, the SC said Republic Act 8436 (Automated Election Law) was clear when it said receipt-printing capabilities should be put in place as part of the minimum safeguards provided by law.
Comelec deactivated the VVPAT for fear that it can be used for vote-buying activities, among other reasons.
READ: Fearing vote buying, Comelec nixes receipts
However, the high court said the poll body could not simply breach requirements of the law just “to assuage its fears regarding the VVPAT.”
The high court also cited the Comelec’s failure to file a comment within the time required by the court. RAM