PCIB Charts - Data 12

8/14/2019 PCIB Charts - Data 12

1/95

The Truth Behind The Truth Behindthe 2004 Electionsthe 2004 Elections

PART 2. Mechanics of Fraud : PCIB areas


2/95

2

Legend:ERs Election Returns

SOV Statement of Votes

COC Certificate of Canvass

Congress

Precinct

City / Municipality

BY PRECINCT

Province

BY MUNICIPALITY

PROCESS

GARCI OPERATIONSGARCI OPERATIONS

Wholesale changesWholesale changesin the COCs toin the COCs to

reverse resultsreverse resultssuch that FPJ'ssuch that FPJ'svotes were given tovotes were given toGMAGMA

Discrepancies inDiscrepancies indifferent electiondifferent electionresult documentsresult documentsare obviousare obvious

PCIB OPERATIONSPCIB OPERATIONS

Pre-manufacturedPre-manufacturedERs wereERs wereswitched withswitched withgenuine ERs asgenuine ERs asinsurance votesinsurance votesfor GMAfor GMA

Dagdag bawas isDagdag bawas is


3/95

FIRST Mechanicof Fraudof Fraud

PAD THE NUMBER OF REGISTEREDVOTERS AND CREATE GHOSTPRECINCTS TO HIDE WHOLESALEADDITION OF VOTES RESULTING INSTATISTICALLY IMPROBABLE VOTERSTURNOUT.

1


4/95

4

1992

+ 4.2M

+ 6.9M

NATIONWIDE INCREASE IN REGISTERED VOTERS

1995

+ 4.2M

1998

- 2.9M

2001

+ 2.4M + 2.1M

July 2002FORECAST

Mar 2004ACTUALComelec

Project of Precincts

CLEAN-UPOF VOTERS

LISTFPJ

DECLARESCANDIDACYNOV 27, 2003

20041999

2000

- 0.1M - 0.045M

38.8M 43.5M


5/95

WHAT THE LAW SAYS :WHAT THE LAW SAYS :

Comelec Resolution 06-0060 dated

13 Feb 04 resolved to use 2002registered voters data (forecast of 38.8M for 2004 elections) as basisto start printing the official ballots.


6/95

WHAT THE LAW SAYSWHAT THE LAW SAYSRA 8189 General Registration ActSec 24. National Central File

There shall be a national central file under the custody of the Commission consisting of all approved voter

registration records in each city or municipality.


7/95


8/95

WHAT THE LAW SAYSWHAT THE LAW SAYS

RA 8189 General Registration ActSec 31 Sealing of Precinct Book of Voters

The Board shall notify within 15 days

before the start of the campaign period of all registered political parties andmembers of the Board of ElectionInspectors to inspect and verify thecompleteness of the voters registrationrecords for each precinct compiled in thebook of voters. t h

i s W A S n

o t

t h i s W

A S n o t

d o n e !

d o n e !


9/95

9LUZON

NCR CAR REGION 1 REGION 2 REGION 3 REGION 4 REGION 5

5,405,059

695,466

2,150,793 1,420,296

4,016,703

5,832,126

2,384,676

+888,702

+941,722

+ 78,484

+172,492

+ 66,802

+520,288

+ 46,908

2004 REGISTERED VOTERS : Forecast 2002 Actual 2004


10/95

10VISAYAS

REGION 6 REGION 7 REGION 8

3,166,173 2,784,440

1,848,394

+230,161

+513,506

+

426,040



11/95

11MINDANAO

REGION 9 REGION 10 REGION 11 REGION 12 CARAGA ARMM

1,568,6621,410,508

2,640,710

1,284,809 1,069,4721,129,231

- 33,790

+ 93,670

+582,730

- 506,295

+656,601

+ 50,489



12/95

1

The PCIB Area consists of Pampanga , Cebu , Iloilo and Bohol. These provinces illustrate the extentof padding of the voters' lists.

PampangaPampanga

Bohol

CebuCebuIloilo


13/95

1

These provinces showed that Mrs.Arroyo had a strong showing inpopularity ratings.

The logic is to maximize her winningmargin in areas where she will win ina clean and honest elections.

Why the PCIB provinces?


14/95

1

GMA received 39% support in theVisayas, and 15%, her lowest, inMetro Manila.

Before the entry of FPJ in thepresidential race, GMA registeredhighest support from the poorest Eclass with 29%. From ABC class, shegot the lowest, 20%.

Pulse Asia in November 2003 shows:


15/95

1

GMA received +44% satisfactoryrating in the Visayas, and 11%,

her lowest, in Metro Manila.

SWS Survey from September 2003to March 2004 shows:


16/95

16

944,092 1,080,751

PAMPANGA


2004 ESTIMATE 2004 ACTUAL

+ 136,695


17/95

17

1,299,6121,780,708

CEBU PROVINCE

+ 481,096




18/95

18

377,637464,802

CEBU CITY

+ 87,165




19/95

19

787,580 923,262

ILOILO PROVINCE

+ 135,682




20/95

20

191,620 240,153

ILOILO CITY

+ 48,533




21/95

21

556,579619,139

BOHOL

+ 62,560




22/95

22

4,157,579

5,108,815

PCIB AREA

+ 951,695




23/95

WHY INCREASE THE NUMBER OFWHY INCREASE THE NUMBER OFREGISTERED VOTERS?REGISTERED VOTERS?

BECAUSE PADDED VOTERS' LISTLOWERS VOTERS' TURNOUT RATE.


24/95

24

PAMPANGA

PADDED VOTERS' LIST LOWERSVOTERS' TURNOUT RATE

944,092799,265

2004 ESTIMATE

85%

REGISTERED

VOTERSTOTAL

VOTES CAST

1,080,751

799,265

2004 ACTUAL

74%

REGISTERED

VOTERS

TOTAL

VOTES CAST


25/95

25CEBU PROVINCE

1,299,612 1,208,810

2004 ESTIMATE

93%

REGISTEREDVOTERS

TOTALVOTES CAST

1,780,708

1,208,810

2004 ACTUAL

68%

REGISTEREDVOTERS

TOTALVOTES CAST



26/95

26

CEBU CITY

377,637327,672

2004 ESTIMATE

87%

REGISTERED

VOTERS

TOTAL

VOTES CAST

464,802327,672

2004 ACTUAL

70%

REGISTERED

VOTERS

TOTAL

VOTES CAST



27/95

27ILOILO PROVINCE

787,580 700,582

2004 ESTIMATE

89%

REGISTEREDVOTERS

TOTALVOTES CAST

923,262700,582

2004 ACTUAL

76%

REGISTEREDVOTERS

TOTALVOTES CAST



28/95

28

ILOILO CITY

191,620 174,326

2003 ESTIMATE

91%

REGISTERED

VOTERS

TOTAL

VOTES CAST

240,153174,326

2004 ACTUAL

73%

REGISTERED

VOTERS

TOTAL

VOTES CAST



29/95

29

BOHOL

556,579 495,717

2004 ESTIMATE

89%

REGISTERED

VOTERSTOTAL

VOTES CAST

619,139495,717

2004 ACTUAL

80%

REGISTERED

VOTERS

TOTAL

VOTES CAST



30/95

3

Aside from being padded,voters lists were also juggled.Padding results in addition of favorable votes. Juggling leadsto the disenfranchisement of legitimate voters and results insubtraction of unfavorable

votes. Disenfranchisement is rampantDisenfranchisement is rampantin opposition areas.in opposition areas.


31/95

SWS EXIT POLLS 10 May 2004 :"900,000 were not able to vote becausetheir names were not in the Voter's Lists"

COMELEC estimated thedisenfranchisement at 900,000

MASSIVE DISENFRANCHISEMENT -MASSIVE DISENFRANCHISEMENT -

VOTERS NAMES WERE NOT FOUNDVOTERS NAMES WERE NOT FOUNDIN THE PRECINCT LISTIN THE PRECINCT LIST


32/95

NAMFREL 23 April 2004 :"Disenfranchisement may have run ashigh as two (2) million votes rather than900,000 that exit polls suggested."

OPPOSITION AND CIVIC GROUPS:" some three (3) million qualified voters were not able to vote last May 10 2004 because of what they claimed was

a defective voter's list."

MASSIVE DISENFRANCHISEMENT -MASSIVE DISENFRANCHISEMENT -VOTERS NAMES WERE NOT FOUNDVOTERS NAMES WERE NOT FOUND

IN THE PRECINCT LISTIN THE PRECINCT LIST


33/95

SECOND Mechanic of Fraudof FraudOVERPRINT EXTRABALLOTS AND SETS OFELECTION RETURNS TO BE

USED FOR ADDITIONALVOTES

2


34/95



13 Feb 04 resolved to approve thequantity of forms for 250,000clustered precincts plus 10%

contingency.


35/95


36/95

MANUFACTURE RESULTS TOENSURE VICTORY OFFAVORED CANDIDATE

USING EXTRA BALLOTS ANDFORMS.

THIRD Mechanic of Fraudof Fraud3


37/95

3

There were obvious andundisputable material defects inthe PCIB election returns thatindicated tampering, alterationsand falsification.

This was also found in manyother areas in the country.


38/95

Sec. 212 Omnibus Election Code

In the ERs, the tally of votes for each candidate is closed by thesigning of names, and affixing of right thumb marks by all threeBoard of Election Inspectors. V

i o l a t e d


39/95

3

NAKED. No signatures andthumbmarks of Board of ElectionInspectors (BEI)

SEMI-NAKED. Incomplete BEIsignatures and thumbmarks.

DEFECT NO. 1

Improper closing of vote tallies


40/95

4

Improper closing


41/95

4

Small finger prints Non-finger prints Fingerprints with artistic designs

DEFECT NO. 2

Non-thumbmark finger prints


42/95

4

Small fingerprints / non-fingerprints


43/95

4

Sample scans

Non-thumbmark

Fingerprints with artistic designs.


44/95

4

Fingerprints with

artistic designs.


45/95

4

DEFECT NO. 3Use of Unauthorized FingerprintTakers

Using violet or red colored ink Using pen ink that leaves brown

residue at the back of the ER

Using black paint that glitters whenhit by light


46/95

WHAT THE LAW SAYS :WHAT THE LAW SAYS :Comelec Resolution 6667 Sec.15states that each precinct shallreceive "two (2) thumbmark /fingerprint takers" among other forms and supplies. (The color of these takers is grayish black.)


47/95



13 Feb 04 resolved to approve thequantity of thumbmark takers of 500,000 pieces plus 10%

contingency.


48/95

Comelec Resolution 04-0286 16 Mar 2004Comelec Resolution 04-0286 16 Mar 2004

Procurement of Indelible Ink and Fingerprint Takers

Approving the procurement of indelible

ink and fingerprint takers, two suppliesrequired by law to be used every election.

Two (2) pieces of fingerprint takers per

precinct, 250mm x 75mm, durable plastic isclear form, good for 600 clear fingerprintimpressions.


49/95

4

Sample scans:

Various ink samples

Use of blue wet ink.


50/95

5

Sample scans:

Various ink samples

This is the back of the previous ER,

now with brownishiron deposits.


51/95

5

Sample scans:

Various ink samples

Use of black paint type ink.


52/95

5

Use of black paint type ink.


53/95

5

WHAT IS THE IMPACT OFWHAT IS THE IMPACT OFTHESE MATERIAL DEFECTSTHESE MATERIAL DEFECTSON THE CANDIDATES VOTES?ON THE CANDIDATES VOTES?

MATERIAL DEFECTS IN PAMPANGA


54/95

54

948

IMPROPERTALLY CLOSING

NON-THUMBMARKFINGER PRINTING

639

UNAUTHORIZEDFINGERPRINT INK

MATERIAL DEFECTS IN PAMPANGAERs EXAMINEDERs EXAMINED :: 1,5211,521ERs WITH DEFECTSERs WITH DEFECTS :: 1,5161,516 TOTAL DEFECTS : 1,923TOTAL DEFECTS : 1,923

336

17.5%

49.3%

33.2%

154,873

GMA PADDED VOTES

MATERIAL DEFECTS IN CEBU PROVINCE


55/95

55

1,962



2,118


MATERIAL DEFECTS IN CEBU PROVINCEERs EXAMINEDERs EXAMINED :: 3,6413,641ERs WITH DEFECTSERs WITH DEFECTS :: 3,5183,518 TOTAL DEFECTS : 4,639TOTAL DEFECTS : 4,639

559

12.1%

42.3% 45.7%

379,944

GMA PADDED VOTES

MATERIAL DEFECTS IN CEBU CITY


56/95

56

814



953


MATERIAL DEFECTS IN CEBU CITYERs EXAMINED : 1,733ERs EXAMINED : 1,733ERs WITH DEFECTS: 1,653ERs WITH DEFECTS: 1,653 TOTAL DEFECTS : 2,291TOTAL DEFECTS : 2,291

524

22.9%

35.5%41.6%

110,751

GMA PADDED VOTES

MATERIAL DEFECTS IN ILOILO PROVINCE


57/95

57

1,101



860


MATERIAL DEFECTS IN ILOILO PROVINCEERs EXAMINED : 1,309ERs EXAMINED : 1,309ERs WITH DEFECTS: 1,301ERs WITH DEFECTS: 1,301 TOTAL DEFECTS : 2,025TOTAL DEFECTS : 2,025

64

3.2%

54.4% 45.5%

120,993

GMA PADDED VOTES

MATERIAL DEFECTS IN ILOILO CITY


58/95

58

494



599


MATERIAL DEFECTS IN ILOILO CITY

ERs EXAMINEDERs EXAMINED :: 907907ERs WITH DEFECTSERs WITH DEFECTS :: 875875ERs WITH NONEERs WITH NONE :: 3232

TOTAL DEFECTS : 1,276TOTAL DEFECTS : 1,276

183

14.3%

38.7%46.9%

54,250

GMA PADDED VOTES

MATERIAL DEFECTS IN BOHOL


59/95

59

1,058



894


MATERIAL DEFECTS IN BOHOLERs EXAMINED : 1,471ERs EXAMINED : 1,471ERs WITH DEFECTS: 1,467ERs WITH DEFECTS: 1,467 TOTAL DEFECTS : 2,230TOTAL DEFECTS : 2,230

278

12.5%

47.4%40.1%

115,495

GMA PADDED VOTES

MATERIAL DEFECTS IN PCIB AREA


60/95

60

6,377



6,063


ERs EXAMINED : 10,582ERs EXAMINED : 10,582ERs WITH DEFECTS: 10,330ERs WITH DEFECTS: 10,330 TOTAL DEFECTS : 14,384TOTAL DEFECTS : 14,384

1,944

13.5%

44.3% 42.2%

936,306

GMA PADDED VOTES


61/95


Comelec Resolution 6669 Sec. 26.Material defects in election returns

"If it should clearly appear that requisites inform or data had been omitted in the electionreturns, the board of canvassers shall call the board of election inspectors concerned toeffect the corrections."


62/95

In view of these massiveviolations, and the inability toinstitute any corrective measure,

the question is:Are these just simplecoincidences or, unintendedneglect or deliberately planned?


63/95


Comelec Resolution 6669 Sec. 27."If the election returns appear to betampered with, altered or falsified or

otherwise not authentic, or were prepared by the BEI concerned, under duress, force,intimidation, or prepared by persons other

than the BEI, the board of canvassers shall use the other copies of said election return." t h i s W A

S n o t

t h i s W A

S n o t

d o n e !

d o n e !


64/95


Comelec Resolution 6669 Sec. 27."If the other copies are likewise tampered with, altered or falsified, not authenticthe board of canvassers or any candidateshall bring the matter to the attention of theCommission."

t h i s W A

S n o t

t h i s W A

S n o t

d o n e !

d o n e !


65/95

CONSPIRACY ORCONSPIRACY OR

COVER-UP?COVER-UP? At the level of the BEIs, why the deafening silence

of the teachers on the defective ERs?

At the local canvassing levels, why the indifferenceof the BOCs at the presence of defective ERs?

At the Comelec level, why the defensive stance

when confronted with these material defects?

At the national canvassing level, why the stubbornrefusal to hear any complaints on authenticity, dueexecution and completeness of the ERs?


66/95

HOW CREDIBLE AREHOW CREDIBLE ARE

THE RESULTS?THE RESULTS?

Let us look at: Vote distribution

Voters' preferences for localfavorite sons and daughters of these provinces.

IMPROBABLE VOTE DISTRIBUTION


67/95

67

1,208,810

80%

CEBU PROVINCE

TOTALVOTES GMA

10%

FPJ

4%

LACSON

3%VILLANUEV

3%ROCO



68/95

68

799,265

80%

PAMPANGA

TOTALVOTES GMA

11%

FPJ

2%2% 4%

VILLANUEVROCOLACSON



69/95

69

700,582

73%

ILOILO PROVINCE

TOTALVOTES GMA

12%

FPJ VILLANUEVROCOLACSON

5% 6% 4%



70/95

70

214,140

78%

1ST DISTRICT CEBU PROVINCE

TOTALVOTES GMA

11%

FPJ

4%

LACSON

4% 3%

ROCO VILLANUEV

1. CARCAR

2. MINGLANILIA

3. NAGA

4. SAN FERNANDO

5. SIBONGA6. TALISAY CITY



71/95

71

225,148

85%

2ND DISTRICT CEBU PROVINCE

TOTALVOTES GMA

8%

FPJ

3%

LACSON

3% 1%ROCO VILLANUEV

1. ALCANTARA

2. ALCOY3. ALEGRIA

4. ARGAO

5. BADIAN

6. BOLJOON7. DALAGUETE

1. DUMANHUG

2. GINATILAN3. MALABUYOC

4. MUAL BUAL

5. OSLOB

6. RONDA7. SAMBOAN

8. SANTANDER



72/95

72

240,600

84%

3RD DISTRICT CEBU PROVINCE

TOTALVOTES GMA

8%

FPJ

3%

LACSON

3% 2%ROCO VILLANUEV

1. ALOGUISAN

2. ASTURIAS

3. BALAMBAN

4. BARILI

5. PINAMUNGAHAN

6. TUBURAN

7. TOLEDO CITY



73/95

73

228,611

83%

4TH DISTRICT CEBU PROVINCE

TOTALVOTES GMA

7%

FPJ

3%

LACSON

4% 3%

ROCO VILLANUEV

1. BANTAYAN

2. BOGO3. DAAN BANTAYAN

4. MADRIDIJOS

5. MEDELLIN

6. SAN REMEGIO7. SANTA FE

8. TABOGON

9. TABUELAN


74/95



75/95

75

346,233

71%

6TH DISTRICT CEBU PROVINCE

TOTALVOTES GMA

15%

FPJ

5%

LACSON

5% 4%

ROCO VILLANUEV

1. CONSOLACION

2. CORDOVA

3. MANDAUE CITY

4. LAPU-LAPU CITY


76/95

VOTERS' PREFERENCE OF CEBUANOS


77/95

77CEBU CITY

175,468

305,018305,018

1998 OSMENA

58%

VOTESGARNERED

TOTALVOTES CAST

220,060

327,869327,869

2004 MACAPAGAL

67%

VOTESGARNERED

TOTALVOTES CAST

VOTERS' PREFERENCE OF ILONGGOS


78/95

78ILOILO PROVINCE

317,032

567,962567,962

1998 SANTIAGO

56%

VOTESGARNERED

TOTALVOTES CAST

512,812

700,528700,528

2004 MACAPAGAL

73%

VOTESGARNERED

TOTALVOTES CAST

VOTERS' PREFERENCE OF ILONGGOS


79/95

79ILOILO CITY

71,478157,369157,369

1998 SANTIAGO

45%

VOTESGARNERED

TOTALVOTES CAST

105,597

174,326174,326

2004 MACAPAGAL

61%

VOTESGARNERED

TOTALVOTES CAST


80/95

FOURTH Mechanicof Fraudof Fraud

TAMPER WITH ELECTIONRESULT FORMS

4


81/95

81

CHANGING OF THE NUMBER

OF REGISTERED VOTERS INPAGE 7 OF CEBU PROVINCESOV

[Show scanned PSOV pages ]


82/95

RE-STAMPING OF SERIALRE-STAMPING OF SERIAL

NUMBERS OF Page 1 of theNUMBERS OF Page 1 of theELECTION RETURNS TOELECTION RETURNS TOCONFORM TO PRE-PLANNEDCONFORM TO PRE-PLANNED

VOTE COUNTSVOTE COUNTSUncovered initially 131 ERs ( from17 provinces and 4 NCR cities ), 29from PCIB area, giving GMA11,921 insurance votes ( minimum ).


83/95

MANUFACTURING ERs WHEREMANUFACTURING ERs WHERE

FPJ GOTFPJ GOT ZEROZERO VOTESVOTES

Uncovered initially 247 ERs (from

25 provinces including NCR), 65ERs from the PCIB area with FPJgetting ZERO votes and GMA

getting 26,335 votes.

MANUFACTURING ERs WHEREMANUFACTURING ERs WHERE


84/95

MANUFACTURING ERs WHEREMANUFACTURING ERs WHEREGMA GOTGMA GOT ZEROZERO VOTESVOTES

Uncovered initially 85 ERs (from15 provinces including NCR) with

GMA getting ZERO votes and FPJgetting 7,663 votes.

A deliberate cosmetic to provide asense of credibility for the results.


85/95

FIFTH Mechanicof Fraudof Fraud

SELECTIVE RESULTS TOBE TRANSMITTED FORCANVASSING TO

MANIPULATE THEOUTCOME.

5

BOHOL 996


86/95

ILOILO 1,115

QUEZON PROV 1,877BUKIDNON 825

EASTERN SAMAR 447

SARANGANI 446ANTIQUE 377

ABRA 216

OTHERS 158

TOTAL

= 6,883 Precincts

at about175 votersper

precinct -

1,204,525 votes were not transmitted


87/95

IMPACT OF THESE


88/95

88

IMPACT OF THESEMECHANICS OF FRAUD

Voters Padded Lists or GMA Vote Bank:- Nationwide: 4.8 million voters- PCIB area: 951,695 voters

Disenfranchised voters due to juggling of voters lists:from 900,000 to 3.0 million voters

Material Defects of ERs from the PCIB area:at least 936,306 GMA padded votes

Unreported precincts whose votes were not counted:Nationwide: about 1.2 million votesIloilo and Bohol : about 369,425 votes


89/95

THESE ARE MINIMUM AND CONSERVATIVETHESE ARE MINIMUM AND CONSERVATIVEESTIMATES OF THE IMPACT OF THE FRAUDESTIMATES OF THE IMPACT OF THE FRAUDEXEMPLIFIED IN THE PCIB AREA.EXEMPLIFIED IN THE PCIB AREA.

BUT ALL INDICATIONS POINT TO THE MASSIVENESSAND THE NATIONWIDE EXTENT OF THE PRE-

MEDITATED PLAN TO THWART THE WILL OF THEELECTORATE.

THESE ALSO SHOW THE DIFFICULTY OFUNCOVERING AND DOCUMENTING THESEFRAUDULENT MECHANICS AND THE RESULTINGIMPACT TO THE INTEGRITY OF THE 2004 NATIONALELECTIONS.


90/95

In summary this study showsIn summary this study shows


91/95

91

In summary, this study shows In summary, this study shows

FPJ GMA11,782,232 11,954,113

2. When the 951,695 padded PCIB votes are subtractedfrom GMA, her lead is reducedto 171, 881 + 171,881+ 1,123,576

12,905,808



92/95

92


FPJ GMA11,782,232 11,954,113

3. When the 365,797 DAGDAG votes to GMA in 6Mindanao provinces are subtracted, FPJ leads by193,916 + 171,881

+ 193,916

11,588,316



93/95

9311,588,316


FPJ GMA11,782,232

4. . . . and the 295,944 BAWAS votes are returned to FPJ,his lead increases to 489,860

+ 193,196+ 489,860

12,078,176

The true winner isThe true winner is


94/95

9411,588,316

FERNANDO POE JR !FERNANDO POE JR !

FPJ GMA

. . . and his lead does NOT even include VOTES SHAVED from

+ 489,860

12,078,176

NCR and Regions 1 to 5, 9 to 12.


95/95

END

Documents

PCIB Charts - Data 12