Real score in UPAA polls

Although I am an alumnus of another school, I can not help but meddle into the affairs of that "public school beside Ateneo", the University of the Philippines.My otherwise dormant intrusiveness and curiosity were aroused after I saw on TV a news about the recent brouhaha in the elections of the State University’s Alumni Association Board. And why not.

All this time I still nurture the thought that winning elections at any cost is an obssession exclusively pertaining to those unique species of politicians aspiring for public office bred only in the Philipines. While I have heard of some elections in some social or fan and fun clubs or hobby organizations degenerate into acrimonious wranglings that result in breakaway groups, I did not expect the elections in such prestigious organization as the UP Alumni Association would take the low road to politics Philippine style. I expected the UPAA to set the example to our politicians on how to conduct elections in a clean, dignified and honorable way under an atmosphere of trust, confidence and good will among the aspirants and the electoral body overseeing the election. Sad to say, satisfying my curiosity left me more disappointed.

UPAA was supposed to elect 23 members of the board. Two groups were vying for these seats: the group of NG and the group of DS . The canvassing of the votes cast was scheduled on May 31, 2003. But before that date, NG group filed a petition in the RTC against the Committee on Elections (Comelec) constituted by the incumbent board.They questioned the membership, eligibility and the payment of the membership dues of about 5,000 voters. They presumed that a candidate or group of candidates is behind the attempt to qualify the voters listed in two envelopes whose membership dues were paid by means of nineteen manager’s checks amounting to more than half a million.They alleged that whoever paid the dues bought or intended to buy the votes of those alumni listed in the envelopes.And since the Comelec resolved to allow all alumni who paid their dues on time to cast their votes, they asked the court to stop the Comelec from doing so with respect to these 5,000 voters.

At the hearing of the petition for prohibition/injunction on May 30,2003, the canvassing of the votes for the election of the UPAA Board members was postponed to June 16, 2003 by agreement of the parties. The parties also agreed to allow 1,500 of the questioned voters, whose names have already been checked out and appeared to be qualified,to cast their votes.

Pursuant to this agreement contained in a court order, the Comelec issued a resolution giving the corresponding ballots to the 1,500 voters already verified and requiring the rest in the list to show proof that they are alumni so ballots could also be issued to them upon verification.

Again fearing that the main issue in their petition about alleged vote-buying might be rendered moot and academic if the balance of the questioned list turn out to be also qualified and allowed to vote upon verification,the NG group asked the RTC to stop the process and to order the Comelec not to issue ballots to the rest of those in the questioned list. The court thus issued another order to that effect.

Pending the resolution of the issue on eligibility of the rest of those in the questioned list to vote in the election, partial canvass proceeded on June 16. During the canvass which lasted three days, the NG group, fearing that they would not take the lead in the initial canvass, again asked the Comelec to reconsider its earlier resolution disallowing 155 members whose membership dues were paid by NG with a blank check filled up only after the deadline and the 6,000 year 2002 graduates whose timely payments of dues were still being verified. To counter these moves, the opposing group asked the Comelec to likewise reconsider the 1,700 voters whose names were submitted after the deadline but whose dues were paid before the deadline.

Acting on these motions, the Comelec ruled to allow: (1) the inclusion of all ballots cast by members of class 2002; and(2) the participation in the polls,of 1700 or more and the 155 U.P. alumni earlier disqualified subject to proof of their status, giving them reasonable time within which to cast their ballots.

The June 16 counting ended with some important issues still pending in court and with the unfinished casting of votes by other alumni subsequently allowed to participate. So no official announcement of the results could be made.

But the NG group already went to town proclaiming themselves winners. Court records revealed that they filed a flurry of motions with the RTC all designed to abort the case which they themselves initiated so that they can be proclaimed winners.They wanted the RTC to cite Comelec in contempt for acting on their motions regarding the 2002 graduates and the 155 voters and to annul its resolutions allowing these alumni as well as the 1700 voters of the opposing group to participate in the elections. They asked the court to compel the Comelec to finish the canvass and submit the results despite the unresolved issues on the eligibility of voters. They wanted to be annointed winners on the basis of partial and incomplete results caused by their own mistake of seeking court intervention out of fear of being cheated.

At this stage perhaps, the only hope for a fair ending is for this group to realize and accept in due time that the real score in this unfortunate episode can only be known by setting aside insidious politicking and useless distrusts so as to allow all qualified alumni to participate.

There are, after all, a lot more than meets the eye behind those protestations of victory I saw on TV regarding results of the UPAA elections. Sad to say, the unfolding spectacle only disclosed the alarming trend that even elections to private positions are now becoming more and more similar to the rough and tumble, no holds barred realpolitik plaguing this country where winning an election has become an obsession. Positions of power, no matter how miniscule, are now much coveted priceless commodities.

* * *

E-mail: [email protected]