By Rey G. Panaligan
Revisors of the Presidential Electoral Tribunal said yesterday that Vice President Leni Robredo may have lost 21,000 votes as result of the tribunal’s ruling that only ballots which were shaded at least 50 percent should be counted as valid votes.
On condition of anonymity, the revisors said the votes were lost by Robredo during the manual recount and revision of ballots in 16 towns in Camarines Sur the past month since the work started last April 2.
Finished by the PET revisors were ballots from Baao, Balatan, Bato, Buhi, Bula, Camaligan, Canaman, Ocampo, Gainza, Garchitorena, Lagonoy, Magarao, Pili, Presentacion, Sangay, and San Fernando.
PET revisors started last Monday their work on ballots in 17 more towns and two cities in Camarines Sur, Robredo’s home province.
Based on election results, Robredo was declared winner in the 2016 vice presidential election with 14,418,817 votes or 263,473 more than the 14,155,344 votes garnered by then Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” R. Marcos Jr.
Undergoing manual recount and revision are ballots in 1,400 boxes in 5,418 clustered precincts in Camarines Sur, Iloilo, and Negros Oriental – provinces identified by Marcos in his protest.
Results in the three provinces would determine if the PET would proceed with the Marcos’ protest that covers 132,446 precincts in 27 provinces and cities.
Earlier, Robredo had asked the PET, composed of all Supreme Court justices, to reconsider its April 10 ruling on the 50 percent threshold on shading of ballots.
She cited a 2016 Comelec letter stating that while voters were instructed to shade fully the ovals in the ballots, “the shading threshold was set at about 25 percent of the oval space.”
“In other words, when a mark covers at least 25 percent of the oval, said mark is supposed to be considered a vote by the system,” her motion stated, quoting from the supposed Comelec letter.
This means that the PET knew of the 25 percent threshold, she insisted.
Robredo pointed out that allowing a 50 percent threshold would disenfranchise voters because votes that fell below the threshold have already been counted as valid by the vote counting machines and confirmed by the Random Manual Audit Committee.
She stressed that with the PET’s ruling, “the physical count is now running inconsistent with the results based on the Election Returns, Statement of Votes by Precinct, Ballot Images, and the Voter’s Verifiable Audit Paper Trial.”
