Is Comelec building a new telco?

Over lunch with some columnists last week, President Macapagal-Arroyo said that one major reform she wants to see through has to do with the way we conduct our elections. This is why, she said, she has instructed the Budget Secretary to make sure Comelec is sufficiently funded to carry out its mandate for modernizing our electoral process.

Given the devastated state of our National Treasury, it takes a lot to allocate whatever little we still have for things other than the most basic and essential. Of course we could say that making our democracy work is an essential. But we must make sure that our electoral officials realize that the money we will allocate to help them do their work must be well spent. It bothers me now that the Commission on Elections has given us reasons to doubt.

First of all, the Comelec had not been forthcoming with details of their plans. We get bits and pieces now and then. Will this be another negotiated bid? From the little we read about, there seems to be reason to worry that things are not going to be well. Not only will the Comelec fail to modernize our elections, they will spend an inordinate amount of money trying to fail.

I am more specifically worried about reports that the Comelec intends to build its own data transmission network nationwide. In the absence of more details about the project, it is easy to think that the Comelec apparently wants to build what is effectively another telephone company of its own. The Comelec Chairman has given this the highest priority, going to the extent of saying that computerized counting and canvassing need not push through without this transmission backbone.

I don’t know what kind of transmission system Comelec wants but one thing I am sure of is that there is more than sufficient capacity available from the private telecoms companies. Comelec does not need to build new capacity. Any of the major telecoms companies can give Comelec a secured transmission system for a fraction of the cost of putting up its own. Additionally, the existing telcos have the manpower and expertise to run the system flawlessly. A new exclusive system for the Comelec to be built from scratch must be tested and manpower trained. It will also be underutilized in between elections.

It also does not help improve confidence that the one Comelec commissioner in charge of this project is the one commissioner with the worst possible public reputation for running this kind of high cost project. The dismissal of impeachment charges against her by a House committee is a political act and does not clear her of the charges in the articles of impeachment. Chairman Ben Abalos must be careful that in backing her for the sake of peace within the Commission, he does not lose the confidence of the public in Comelec’s ability to run an honest election.

The 2004 election is going to be one of the most important, if not the most important in our history. It could be a turning point. The Comelec must realize the important role they must play. If they fumble, the consequences could be far-reaching. We can’t afford another Photokina fiasco. Chairman Ben must make sure the Comelec is totally transparent in every thing they do. Anything less is a betrayal of his oath.

Postal thieves

We received this e-mail from Wilhelmina R. Dilag, vice president and head of Customer Care Department, Consumer Banking Group of the Bank of the Philippine Islands.

We write in connection with the article "Post Office Thieves", which came out in your column in Philippine Star, specifically regarding Mr. Arthur Tanty’s report that money orders and checks payable to him were encashed at a BPI branch.

Mr. Tanty’s complaint pertains to three Western Union International Money Orders payable to him totaling $273, which he alleged were fraudulently encashed/deposited at our BPI Carmen Rosales Branch. The Bank investigated the matter and found no basis to suspect that our Branch personnel were in cahoots with so-called postal crooks or criminal syndicates. The deposit of such checks was allowed in good faith based on the Branch’s knowledge of and longstanding valued relationship with the Bank client who deposited the checks into her account.

Based on a standard process that the Bank follows for cases like this, the Bank advised Mr. Tanty to go through the normal procedure of seeking payment for the checks directly from the issuer, Integrated Payment Systems, Inc. (IPSI). He was also advised to indicate in his claim that he has not received any payment nor endorsed any relevant check payments from them. IPSI may then make representations with its drawee bank (in his case, Wells Fargo Bank, Grand Junction, Colorado) for the corresponding reimbursement. The drawee bank will collect and BPI will then pay Wells Fargo Bank.

We assure Mr. Tanty that the Bank is just as eager as he is to resolve this matter. We also assure you and the banking public that the Bank continues to exercise vigilance against such criminal syndicates in line with safeguarding our clients’ interests.

I just want to make a few points on the response of BPI. Granted that Mr. Tanty must follow a prescribed procedure to get his money, I am bothered by what seems to me is a denial of BPI that somehow, the bank was used to accomplish a crime. Simply, the bank accepted a stolen money order for deposit, even if in good faith.

That being so, what has the bank done so that this won’t happen again? Did BPI ask the depositor to explain? Did BPI close the account? I worry that BPI’s response in this e-mail still talks of a valued relationship with the client who deposited the stolen money order. My point is, the banking system should not be a party to criminal syndicates. Post Office thefts have been a long standing problem and the country’s largest private commercial bank should not allow its facilities to be used by mail thieves.

I have worked in two banks myself and one of the things pounded in the heads of bankers is the need to know their clients. Did the BPI branch officers in Carmen Rosales, Pangasinan really know the business of their client who deposited the stolen money order? If so, could they be in cahoots? Then, why did the BPI management, based on the e-mail, seem to have quickly absolved the branch officers? If they didn’t know the client, that’s a violation of a principal rule for bankers and reveals incompetence. They should be disciplined or fired.

I use BPI myself and I am a satisfied client. The officers in the branch where I do my business are simply first class. However, it bothers me that in at least one part of the system, it had been conclusively shown that a criminal syndicate of mail thieves had been successfully using BPI’s system to launder their stolen checks. I brought my concerns up to Paeng Buenaventura and he said he shares them. He asked BSP officials to investigate.

I still say the Ayalas should not wait for BSP to act. They should look into this problem and deal with it decisively. It reflects on them and their integrity, eventually.

Senior citizen conversation

Jack Gesner forwarded this one.

Three old guys were out walking.

First one says, "Windy isn’t it?"

Second one says, "No it’s Thursday."

Third one says, "So am I, let’s get a beer."

(Boo Chanco’s e-mail address is [email protected])