QUEZON City, Philippines (October 22) – Rappler posted in their website that qualified voters may now register and have their biometrics captured in malls to vote in the May 2016 national elections. The Commission on Elections (Comelec) has partnered with top mall operators in the country to set up satellite voters’ registration booths inside their respective malls. Comelec Chairman Andy Bautista said the poll body decided to bring this service to malls to help some voters who find it “difficult or inconvenient” to register in their local Comelec offices.
The Commission on Elections , more popularly known as Comelec, is determined to push through with its plan to use various shopping malls all over the country as voting centers despite questions on the legality of the move.
If it pushes through, the Comelec would be setting a precedent that could change the complex of future elections as this would be the first time in the country’s electoral history that voting would be done in privately-owned malls, whose owners or members of their extended families could be related either by consanguinity or by inter-marriages to a particular candidate, which, in effect, could affect the credibility of the polls.
There are lots of people who are in favor of the COMELEC’s plan but there are also some who are not.
Pimentel, a Bar topnocher, said registration inside malls is alright but not the holding of elections there.
“Voting must be done in voting centers which are public property and not private property which are subject to the regulations of the owners,” he said in a statement.
Larrazabal and Macalintal expressed similar concerns, saying mall voting runs counter to provisions of the Omnibus Election Code, particularly Section 155.
Section 155 of Batas Pambansa 881, or the Omnibus Election Code of the Philippines, states, “No polling place shall be located in a public or private building owned, leased or occupied by any candidate or of any person who is related to any candidate within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity or any officer of the government or leader of any political party.”
Larrazabbal said the move needs to be studied further, otherwise it would create a lot of problems later, which include possible disenfranchisement of voters as well as procedural and jurisdictional issues.
Macalintal, a prominent election lawyer, explained that the law sets only three parameters on the transfer of polling places, namely: through petitions of political parties, through a vote of 50 percent of the voters or by a Comelec resolution if existing precinct is no longer usable.
He pointed out that there would be a conflict of interest if the mall is owned by a political clan or a family that has a member running for office.
Also registering its opposition is the Comelec-accredited Church-based election watchdog Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting (PPCRV), which said the plan should be abandoned for further study.
“Why not look at the possibility of voting in malls? We believe it will encourage people to go out and vote,” the poll chief added. “This is a step in the right direction and this will enhance the voting experience of our voters.”
Some people believed that if malls are going to be used as voting precincts, almost half of the population will be in malls in the Election Day. Some people may stay and stick to the traditional way of voting in public schools.
Whether or not the voting in malls will be pushed, it is more important that we focus on who are we going to vote. A place of voting is necessary but it is in the hands of the Filipinos lies the discipline in the way of voting.
(written by Joana Joyce Marcaida, edited by Jay Paul Carlos, additional research by Vince Alvin Villarin)