||I would not choose honest IT and management practitioners who would
recommend good systems with proper controls. With them around, it would
be next to impossible for me to tamper with the results of elections.
Also, they would recommend systems that are so inexpensive that there
won’t be enough money to play around with (that is, after the money
passes through our pockets).
||For the automation of elections, I would choose a non-transparent
precinct-counting technology, like Direct Recording Electronic (DRE),
Optical Mark Recognition (OMR), or some similar systems. As such, it
would be difficult to trace machine-embedded cheating mechanisms. In
addition, the protest process would be so weakened that there will be
very few of them.
||I would look for a vendor who would be willing to “play ball” with
me. I would commit a sure win for them, come bidding time. If I could,
I’d also get “my” Comelec Commissioners to award to them contracts on a
negotiated basis. It should not be difficult to find such a vendor; the
Internet has a wealth of information on the bad eggs of election
||I would instruct “my” Commissioners to rig the bidding so that my
chosen vendor would win, no matter what. Being lawyers, they would take
care of looking for legal angles and justification, lame as they might
be, so there’s a semblance of fairness in the bidding process.
||I would tell “my” Commissioners not to worry about violating laws and
even their own bidding rules. Election advocates will complain, but they
should just be ignored.
||I would instruct my chosen vendor to rig the computer programs to favor certain candidates – which means rigging both the
precinct-counting machines and the Consolidation and Canvassing System
||I would not bother hiring outside service providers to manage the
project as doing so would only make my control of the operation more
||In order that the cheating mechanisms in the computer programs would
not be discovered, I would look for ways by which review of the source
code by political parties and groups would not happen. Allowing it would
only open the risk that the embedded cheating mechanisms would be
||I would ignore the legal requirement for digital signatures to make
the transmissions easy to manipulate.
||I would tell the machine vendor not to provide the complete Election
Returns (ER) data and the canvassing data in Comelec’s public website so
no one can check if the consolidation and canvassing of the results are
accurate; we could pass on the blame to the telecommunications companies
for the incomplete data.
||To make sure protests will not prove anything fishy, I would cause
the printing of additional ballots, even after the elections, so that we
could replace the contents of the ballot boxes to match the
machine-printed and “doctored” results.
||If some individuals or groups try to block my plans, I would
instruct Comelec to call them “election saboteurs”, “trouble-makers”, or
||I would also look for “envelopmental” journalists who will write
articles attacking and discrediting those “trouble-makers”.
|| I would try to influence some legislators to become “mouth-pieces”
of the Comelec and its machine vendor.
||If I had any influence in the Supreme Court, I would make it known
to the justices that there are no alternatives to the Comelec-chosen
machine and that for the sake of our elections, the Court should support
the decisions of the Comelec.