The man behind the controversy: Dr. Antonio Contreras

Political science students know his name—he is, after all, the only professor teaching one of their majors. But recently, his name has become famous (or infamous?), not only within the University, but also around the country, as some of his actions have once again put him in the spotlight. De La Salle University’s own Dr. Antonio Contreras sits down with The Menagerie to tell us of his life, his bet on the 2016 elections, and his say on which students to pick (and avoid).


The analyst’s background

If you’ve heard of Dr. Antonio Contreras as anything other than a professor in DLSU, you might’ve seen him on your TVs or heard him speak on the airwaves as a political analyst. He has been approached by the media several times to give his two cents regarding various political matters, mostly because of two factors: he has plenty of experience and knowledge under his belt, and he’s definitely not afraid to speak his mind.

Dr. Contreras first started teaching in 1982 at the University of the Philippines — Los Baños before going to the United States for his PhD in Political Science, which he earned from the University of Hawaii. About 15 years ago, he became a professor in De La Salle University, and even served as the College of Liberal Arts Dean from 2004 to 2008.

Armed with decades of experience in his field and well-known for his tendency to speak his mind no matter the opposition, Dr. Contreras’ strong opinions attract plenty of attention. In fact, one of his most talked about actions in the past year was his filing a petition to cancel Grace Poe’s Certificate of Candidacy (COC).

MCC_4519 []

On the 2016 elections

With the 2016 elections fast approaching, Dr. Contreras’ ideas are once again being sought after. In fact, right before his interview with The Lasallian, he was sharing his thoughts with a camera crew from GMA. However, it seems selecting a candidate to root for is difficult, even for a man with his background.

In a twist of fate, one of the presidentiables that had Dr. Contreras’ vote years ago is the very person he filed a petition against. Sen. Grace Poe was once someone Dr. Contreras thought had the potential to lead the country, and in the early stages of her political career, Dr. Contreras had a more positive view of her. “She was a fresh face. She wasn’t a traditional politician so I guess I was hoping that she would be different. Also, she was clean. No record of corruption. I knew she didn’t have experience but it doesn’t mean you’re not qualified to be a senator,” he says.

However, Dr. Contreras shares how he began to lose faith in Poe during her time spent as a senator. According to him, the senator had become too reliant on image. Dr. Contreras explains, “Wala siyang track record sa senado. For example, she hasn’t made any ground-shaking legislations. She says she’s pro-child rights and gusto niyang ipaglaban yung kaso ng foundlings, pero wala siyang na-file ­na bill. Lumabas lang yung issue niya doon kung kalian binabato na sakanya. Kung talagang malapit sa puso mo yan, edi sana pagkaupo mo palang, gumagawa ka na ng bill, diba?” There was also the issue of Poe’s residency, which was the reason Contreras’ filed a petition to cancel her COC last October. With similar petitions also being filed on the issue of her citizenship, Poe was no longer a viable choice in Dr. Contreras’ eyes.

Mar Roxas is also not among those that Dr. Contreras’ is considering voting for. The professor shares that he finds that, “Roxas’s mantra of continuing ang tuwid na daan” could be very problematic. Taking Poe and Roxas out of his options, Dr. Contreras finds that he is still left undecided among the other leading presidentiables of Vice President Jejormar Binay, Davao City Mayor Rodrigo Duterte, or Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago. According to him, this year’s elections will be especially difficult as he believes that every candidate has a major drawback. “You have to choose your poison. Compromise mo yung human rights and character ni Duterte. Alleged corruption ni Binay. May sakit na si Miriam.” Talking about the coming national elections, the affair is something that he can only describe as depressing.


On picking and avoiding

Besides his immense knowledge of politics, Dr. Contreras also stands out in his overall character as a teacher and educator. A notable example of Dr. Contreras not shying away from giving his opinion is how he put up the student counterpart of the popular Profs to Pick Facebook group.

As upcoming enlistment for the second term of the academic year was approaching, the page was once again lively. It was simple: students giving feedback on professors they’ve had in the past to help out fellow Lasallians decide which classes they wanted to take in the future. But the former College of Liberal Arts Dean began to observe that some reviews were going overboard. “Grabe na kung mag-banat ng professors,he says, even stating a couple of names used by students to describe their past professors, and shaking his head in disapproval. “Mali yung ethics, mali yung pinapakitang attitude ng isang Lasallian.”

Dr. Contreras recalls his earliest encounter of people giving feedback on their professors. Back when Facebook wasn’t a household term, DLSU professors were evaluated by current and former students on the website “When I was the dean [back in 2004], it was an opportunity for me to read the feedbacks of students on teachers, although they come anonymously. And there, I already saw some tendencies of students to malign and talk badly about their professors.”

Years later, after what was to him the last straw, he finally made the Facebook page ‘DLSU students to PICK and AVOID’. A number of Lasallians then burst into an uproar, with some students even brave enough to construct long arguments targeted at him and his actions.

But what’s its purpose, really? What’s his motive?  “Parang symbolic lang ‘yun,” he shares, with arms crossed. “It’s satirical. Pang-asar, pang-inis. More of… just providing a space to make a point. I did it because no one’s doing it. When you don’t talk about it, then, you just let the abuse happen.”

“I’m a teacher, and I want to teach the students,” he shares. “[To tell the students that] if you know how to give it, you should also know how to take it.”

At the end of the day, despite (and, perhaps, because of) all the controversial things he’s said and done, Dr. Antonio Contreras remains respected by his students. And whether it’s his actions involved in Philippine politics or in the lessons he wants to teach his students, the political analyst will not shy away from doing what he things needs to be done.

Is he a good professor? He sits up straight in his seat, and bravely tells us, “I think I’m a very good professor. You go and ask around.”

Audrey Giongco

By Audrey Giongco

Nathaniel Sierras

By Nathaniel Sierras

15 replies on “The man behind the controversy: Dr. Antonio Contreras”

what a pretentious gaytard. pretends knowledge in statistical analysis without output backing it up. just wants to be a contrarian so he can continue pretending he is the smartest guy in the room even if he clearly is not. should base his opinions in actual facts as he is an academic. this is why la salle can never beat UP. please don’t hire teachers like him.

Contreras, Antonio P.
De La Salle University-Manila, Manila, Philippines
Author ID: 35896699500
About Scopus Author Identifier | View potential author matches
Other name formats:
Contreras, Antonio

Documents:13 Analyze author output
Citations:64 total citations by 63 documents

h-index: 3 View h-graph

Subject area:
Social Sciences , Arts and Humanities View More
13 Documents|Cited by 63 documents |14

h-index: 13!

Reyes, Reinabelle De Los
University of Chicago, Kavli Institute for Cosmological Physics, Chicago, United States
Author ID: 23005892700
About Scopus Author Identifier | View potential author matches
Other name formats:
Reyes, Reinabelle
Reyes, R. de Los

View More

Documents:16 Analyze author output
Citations:772 total citations by 734 documents

h-index: 13 View h-graph

Co-authors:150 (maximum 150 co-authors can be displayed)
Subject area:
Physics and Astronomy , Earth and Planetary Sciences View More
16 Documents|Cited by 734 documents |150 co-authors

16 documents View in search results format

Sort on: Date Cited bySort on one of the other available options….


Cyberlibel is worse than ‘Game of Thrones’ spoilers

By: Oscar Franklin Tan

SINGAPORE—You blackened your Facebook profile picture in 2012 over the Cybercrime Prevention Act. You posted a sycophantic #NonLibelousTweet in 2014 after the Supreme Court left libel in the law. Where are you now that actor Robin Padilla and De La Salle University professor Antonio Contreras threaten cyberlibel cases?

Ironically, the #NonLibelousTweet campaign failed to emphasize that it cannot be libel to comment on public affairs in a democracy. It is not libel to comment on a matter of public interest or a public figure, someone who has voluntarily thrust himself into the limelight and attracts public discussion. On such topics, it is only libel if there is “actual malice,” if one knew statements were false or recklessly disregarded possible falsity. The bar is so high on such topics that even false or inaccurate statements are not libel, to make room for honest error.

A confidential disbarment case was filed against Ampatuan massacre lead defense lawyer Sigfrid Fortun for allegedly delaying the trial. In the 2013 Fortun case, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio refused to punish media, including the Inquirer, for reporting this after another lawyer leaked it.

First, we are free to discuss matters of public interest, such as a shocking case’s conduct. Such matters are no less public if a private person is intertwined, voluntarily or not. Second, we are free to discuss public figures. Fortun was a key player in the high-profile case and, previously, in former president Joseph Estrada’s impeachment.

On Election Day, Robin Padilla posted a picture of a ballot shaded with a vote for incoming President Rodrigo Duterte. Miss Krizzy (@krizzy_kalerqui) tweeted: “This is a clear violation of election law. Throw him in jail!”

Taking Carpio’s lead, this is not libel. First, a democracy must discuss election violations on Election Day. Actors Kathryn Bernardo and Daniel Padilla were accused of such violation. Second, Padilla is a public figure, a celebrity who campaigned for Duterte all the way to Hong Kong.

Robin Padilla astoundingly filed a libel case with the National Bureau of Investigation. He argued he posted a sample ballot and his 1994 conviction for illegal possession of firearms disqualifies him from voting. This is irrelevant; discussing his alleged election violation is still not libel.

Sen. Ferdinand Marcos Jr. claimed that “numerous academicians” cited statistical irregularities in election results. Sen. Bam Aquino, a summa cum laude Ateneo management engineering graduate, countered that only two did. Contreras, a DLSU political science professor, and former Ateneo economics professor, Dave Yap, cried statistical irregularity from Facebook to mass media to an aborted University of the Philippines forum.

I doubt Contreras’ first assumption that election results were randomly transmitted. Certain regions transmitted first, and voting patterns per region are different. Arguments fall apart without this key randomness assumption, for reasons explained in the first week of a statistics class.

So many argued Contreras misapplied basic statistics. The Ateneo Mathematics Society launched a Facebook “crash course” on statistics on May 15. One hundred four scientists signed “Call for Responsible Data Science in National Discourse” on May 24.

UP physics professor Ian Vega reacted to this:

“[Contreras is] either slow, too proud or paid. Whatever the case, he’s a sorry excuse for an academic.”

The next day, Contreras publicly posted he would sue Vega for libel.

Rey Soriano posted after May 27’s canvass: “Academics like you… allowed falsities to gain currency by providing a semblance of ‘science’ to your madness.” Within half an hour, Contreras posted: “Another candidate for libel?”

Contreras posted on May 26 that “many people are now busy editing or even deleting their derogatory posts,” but he took pictures. “So the next question is who will be next,” he wrote. “I just hope your science will now be able to save you from jail.”

Academics are alarmed by these threats, including a Dec. 9, 2015, post where Contreras cited students “maligning” him on a website “Profs to Pick and Avoid.” He said if he sees a post “where you can be identified, then I promise you that I will make sure that DLSU will not only kick you out, but you will also land in jail.”

Vega and Soriano’s posts are not libel. First, Marcos and Aquino cited Contreras in the Senate. Any citizen may debate his credibility, even rudely, just as one is free to call Marcos or Aquino a sorry excuse for a senator or mad. Second, Contreras is a public figure. He so publicly pursued his accusations and previously sued Sen. Grace Poe over her citizenship.

The greatest evil is that Miss Krizzy and Vega actually deleted their original messages. Democracy dies when citizens hesitate to speak and cold silence replaces vibrant speech.

Our Constitution demands that speech be met with more speech. Cyberlibel is the weapon of the intellectual and moral coward, someone so bankrupt in the marketplace of ideas that he must dragoon law into silencing competitors. We must etch onto our culture that threatening libel is more despicable than posting “Game of Thrones” spoilers. We must make it socially unthinkable for someone to cry libel instead of simply replying— or for a prosecutor or judge not to immediately throw out a Facebook libel charge.

The next time you hesitate on Facebook, just cite Carpio. If he stares down the Chinese Navy with ancient maps, he can scare off internet trolls.

For more on libel’s limits, read “Articulating the Complete Philippine Right to Privacy,” 82(4) Phil., L.J. 78 (2008).

Call for Responsible Data Science in National Discourse

May 24, 2016

People need to be able to trust data. This means there is a great responsibility on the part of those who collect, analyze, interpret, and report data, especially when it concerns matters of public interest.

We, the undersigned data scientists— engaged in mathematics, statistics, mod- elling, programming, analysis, and visualization— hold each other accountable to the highest standards of professional integrity and competence.

Recently, there has been public confusion on assertions of electoral fraud based on the analysis of data from election returns. In light of this, we make the following appeal:

• To those who analyze and interpret data:

– to exercise prudence and nuance in the statement of their conclusions

– to clearly cite the data sources and methodology used in their analysis

– to subject their results to critical peer review, prior to and after publication

“The first principle is that you must not fool yourself— and you are the easiest person to fool.”

— Richard Feynman

• To those who report on results of data analysis:

– to refrain from reporting claims at face value without careful vetting

– to seek multiple independent assessments of the validity of the analysis and conclusions before publication

– to report with proper perspective, context, depth, and nuance “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.”

— Carl Sagan

• To those who read reports and claims based on data analysis:

– to view statements made by experts with a healthy amount of skepticism

and not automatically accept them as correct and valid

– to look for multiple independent assessments before judging the correctness and validity of an analysis and its conclusions

– to refrain from spreading unverified claims without sufficient critical evalu- ation

“Don’t believe everything you read on the Internet.”

— Abraham Lincoln Meme

As a community, we believe in the power of data to raise the level of national discourse— not only in the context of the electoral process, but in many other areas of public concern, including health, disasters, and security, among others. We welcome the greater availability of open datasets in the country and the opportunity to harness this data for the public good.

We recognize that with this power comes great responsibility. To be trusted to use data correctly and responsibly, we must raise the level of transparency and account- ability within our own community. In the spirit of peer review, we have the duty not only to be careful in the work that we do, but also to be critical of the work of others.

Here, we assert that an inverted V-shaped graph of the difference of votes between vice-presidential candidates Marcos and Robredo, plotted against the percentage of votes transmitted, does not amount to evidence of fraud. Given that the votes came in from different regions at different times, the shape of the graph is, in fact, the expected pattern. Many individuals and groups carried out independent analyses and commu- nicated technical and logical arguments arriving at this conclusion.

The ability to give and receive critical feedback, without personal malice, is a core value of the scientific culture, a value essential to the integrity of the scientific enter- prise. This statement is made in this spirit— without ill intent toward any individual, but out of a sense of duty to the community.

The undersigned 104 signatories as of May 24, 2016, include the following:

1. Paolo Abarcar, Ph.D., Department of Economics, University of Michigan-Ann Arbor

2. Mitch Abdon, Monitoring & Evaluation Specialist, DAI

3. Luisito Abueg, Assistant Professor, School of Economics, De La Salle University

4. Christian Alis, Postdoctoral Research Associate, University College London

5. Velimor Almonte, Assistant Professor in Mathematics, Malayan Colleges Laguna

6. Ricardo Ang III, Instructor, Department of Mathematics, Ateneo de Manila Uni- versity

7. Romer Kristi Aranas, Research Associate, PHL-Microsat DPAD

8. Jefferson Arapoc, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, University of the Philippines Los Ban ̃os

9. Mary Grace Bacus, Analytics Consultant

10. Rick Bahague, Data Scientist, Talas Data Intelligence, Inc.

11. John Baluyut, Assistant Professor, University of Great Falls

12. Francis Bautista, Data Scientist, Talas Data Intelligence, Inc.

13. Julian Bautista, Graduate Student, The New School for Social Research

14. Marinel Benosa, Analyst, Meralco

15. Allan B. I. Bernardo, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Macau

16. Ebba Boye, Graduate Student, The New School for Social Research

17. Oliver Braunschweig, Graduate Student, The New School for Social Research

18. Joseph Brillantes, Data Scientist, YesCredit, Inc.

19. Jeric Briones, Instructor, Department of Mathematics, Ateneo de Manila Uni- versity

20. Carl Dominick Calub, Data Analyst, Talas Data Intelligence, Inc.

21. Renz Adrian Calub, Assistant Professorial Lecturer, School of Economics, De La Salle University

22. Michelle Castillo, Graduate Student, UP National College of Public Administra- tion and Governance

23. Raymond Castillo, Data & Analytics Lead

24. Peter Julian Cayton, Assistant Professor, School of Statistics, University of the Philippines Diliman

25. Christine Chan, Research Assistant, Ateneo de Manila University 3

26. Geoffrey Chua, Assistant Professor, Nanyang Technological University

27. Nathania Chua, Instructor, Department of Quantitative Methods and Informa- tion Technology, Ateneo de Manila University

28. Angelo Luis Cortez, Lecturer, Department of Mathematics, Ateneo de Manila University

29. Joshua Cortez, Data Science Analyst, DataSeer

30. Lucinda David, Ph.D. Candidate, Lund University

31. Leandro de Castro, Assistant Professor, Department of Chemical Engineering, University of the Philippines Los Ban ̃os

32. Emmanuel Lorenzo de los Santos, Research Fellow, University of Warwick

33. Pecier Paul Decierdo, Science Education Officer, The Mind Museum

34. John Michael dela Paz, Instructor, College of Education, University of the Philip- pines Diliman

35. Jonnel dela Rosa, Data Scientist, Talas Data Intelligence, Inc.

36. Mariel Rae Kho Fangre, Consumer Insights Manager

37. Abigail Favis, Instructor, Department of Environment Science, Ateneo de Manila University

38. Jaime Miguel Favis, Data Analyst, Altitude Games

39. Cherry Frondozo, Knowledge Management and Research Coordinator, Asian In- stitute of Management

40. Roderick Galam, Research Associate, Free University of Berlin

41. Melissa Garabiles, Instructor, Department of Psychology, Ateneo de Manila Uni- versity

42. David Garcia, Geographer and Urban Planner

43. Felan Carlo Garcia, Science Research Specialist, Advanced Science and Technol- ogy Institute

44. Miguel Barretto Garcia, Ph.D. Student, University of Zurich

45. Albert Gavino, Data Scientist, Talas Data Intelligence, Inc.

46. Maria Carissa Geronimo, Data Analyst


47. Charlotte Kendra Gotangco, Assistant Professor, Department of Environmental Science, Ateneo de Manila University

48. Jason Haw, Lecturer, Health Sciences Program, Ateneo de Manila University

49. Erin Hayde, Graduate Student, The New School for Social Research

50. Nathaniel Hermosa II, Associate Professor, National Institute of Physics, Uni- versity of the Philippines Diliman

51. Riel Carlo Ingeniero, M.S. Student, Universiteit Gent/Universiteit Antwerpen/Vrije Universiteit Brussel

52. Ivy Intano, Analytics Consultant, BusinessMinds

53. Rowen Iral, Chief Science Officer, TIMS Philippines

54. Justin Irigo, Advanced Analytics, Globe Telecom

55. Angelyn Lao, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics, De La Salle University

56. Carmela Lao, Quant Trader

57. Arnold Lau, M.A. Candidate, Columbia University

58. VernelLawas,AssistantProfessor,InstituteofMathematicalSciencesandPhysics, University of the Philippines Los Ban ̃os

59. Jean Loyola, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Institute of Mathematical Sciences and Physics, University of the Philippines Los Ban ̃os

60. David Maddy, Graduate Student, The New School for Social Research

61. Juan Carlo Mallari, Instructor, Department of Mathematics, Ateneo de Manila University

62. Gayline Manalang, Jr., Assistant Professor & CIDS Research Fellow, Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, University of the Philippines Manila

63. Ino Mantaring, Data Scientist, Talas Data Intelligence, Inc.

64. Jesus Lemuel Martin, Jr., Instructor, Department of Mathematics, Ateneo de Manila University

65. Douglas McDonald, Graduate Student, The New School for Social Research

66. Adrian Mendoza, Ph.D. Candidate, School of Economics, University of the Philip- pines Diliman

67. Kristin Militante, Assistant Instructor, Department of Finance and Accounting, Ateneo de Manila University

68. Katrina Miradora, Graduate Student, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies

69. Felix Muga II, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics, Ateneo de Manila University

70. Ma. Regina Paz Onglao, Lecturer, Ateneo de Manila University

71. Yasmin Ortiga, Ph.D., Research Fellow, Nanyang Technological University

72. Selen Ozcelik, Graduate Student, The New School for Social Research

73. Remrick Patagan, Research Director, Institute for Development and Econometric Analysis, Inc.

74. JC Albert Peralta, Research Assistant, Ateneo de Manila University

75. Cilicia Uzziel Perez, Graduate Student, National Institute of Physics, University of the Philippines Diliman

76. Jan Carlo Punongbayan, Ph.D. Student, School of Economics, University of the Philippines Diliman

77. Jomar Rabajante, Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Institute of Mathematical Sciences and Physics, University of the Philippines Los Ban ̃os

78. Radine Rafols, Consultant, Asian Development Bank

79. Vicente Reventar III, Lecturer, John Gokongwei School of Management, Ateneo de Manila University

80. Reinabelle Reyes, Ph.D., Lecturer, Department of Information Systems and Com- puter Science, Ateneo de Manila University

81. Rosula Reyes, Ph.D., Associate Professor, Department of Electronics, Computer, and Communications Engineering, Ateneo de Manila University

82. Nigel Rimando, Instructor, Department of Mathematics, Ateneo de Manila Uni- versity

83. Joseph Roxas, Researcher, Savvysherpa, Inc.

84. Kidjie Saguin, Research Assistant, Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, Na- tional University of Singapore

85. Joel Sanqui, Professor of Statistics, Appalachian State University 6

86. Kurt Gerrard See, Ph.D. Student, Department of Economics, University of Min- nesota

87. Julius Sempio, Research Associate, PHL-Microsat DPAD

88. Francis James Singun, Business Analytics Lead

89. Beatrice Victoria Sison, Data Science Analyst, DataSeer

90. Aivin Solatorio, Lead Data Scientist, Kalibrr

91. Kimberly Solon, Ph.D. Candidate, Lund University

92. Kendall Stephenson, Legislative Financial Analyst, New York City Council

93. Marion Lara Tan, Instructor, Department of Finance and Accounting, Ateneo de Manila University

94. Martha Lauren Tan, Lecturer, Department of Quantitative Methods and Infor- mation Technology, Ateneo de Manila University

95. Randy Tuan ̃o, Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Ateneo de Manila University

96. Jerrold Tubay, D.Sc., Assistant Professor, Institute of Mathematical Sciences and Physics, University of the Philippines Los Ban ̃os

97. Jerome Unidad, Ph.D., Postdoctoral Researcher, Forschungszentrum Juelich GmbH

98. Alvin Patrick Valentin, Instructor, Department of Quantitative Methods and Information Technology, Ateneo de Manila University

99. Michael Francis Ian Vega, Ph.D., Associate Professor, National Institute of Physics, University of the Philippines Diliman

100. John Paul Vergara, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Information Systems and Computer Science, Ateneo de Manila University

101. Deborah Villa, Lecturer, Department of Environmental Science, Ateneo de Manila University

102. Alyson Yap, M.B.A., Instructor, Department of Quantitative Methods and In- formation Technology, Ateneo de Manila University

103. Andrew Yap, Analytics Consulting Lead, Nexus Technologies, Inc.

104. William Yu, Lecturer, Ateneo de Manila University

What fraud?
Philippine Daily Inquirer
01:16 AM May 13th, 2016

Electoral fraud is electoral fraud, whether it is committed in the name of the ruling party or a candidate with unlimited funds or a well-oiled machinery. History’s lesson is clear: The one unforgivable political crime is massive cheating at the polls.

It was not the allegations of massive corruption that finally drove the Marcoses out of Malacañang, but evidence of systematic cheating during the snap election of Feb. 7, 1986. (When Juan Ponce Enrile, then the defense minister, broke away from the Marcos regime, he admitted in public that he had manufactured hundreds of thousands of votes for Ferdinand Marcos in Cagayan Valley; it was a strategic confession, meant to provoke both anger against Marcos and sympathy for the rebels, from the people who were coming to Enrile’s aid.)

It was not the allegations of corruption linked to Gloria Arroyo’s husband that precipitated her crisis of legitimacy and made her the most unpopular president since surveys became a regular feature of Philippine politics, but the unrefuted evidence of a conspiracy to commit electoral fraud. The object of that infamous phone call between her and election commissioner Virgilio Garcillano was to pad her vote total in the 2004 elections with a million votes.

Even in the case of President Joseph Estrada, it was not the allegations of corruption that forced him onto that lonely barge that ferried him out of Malacañang in 2001; it was the brazen 11-10 vote in the Senate, convened as an impeachment court, which prevented the opening of the second Jose Velarde envelope. That prompted hundreds of thousands of people to congregate at the Edsa Shrine.

We leave it to the academic experts to determine why it is these voting anomalies that exercise our civic energies so; why charges of “daya” are more potent than accusations of corruption.

But there is a valid way of alleging electoral fraud.

In Marcos’ case, it was the combination of the Commission on Elections workers’ walkout, the multiple instances of vote-buying and voter intimidation, the lawsuits, eventually the confessions. When the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines issued its historic pastoral statement declaring that Marcos no longer had the moral authority to serve as president, it was based, solidly, on evidence.

In Arroyo’s case, it was the damning recording, played over and over again, which convinced many that there was in fact a conspiracy to rig the elections the old-fashioned way: through the manipulation of the canvassing stage.

The allegations of election fraud, later downscaled to concerns, raised by vice presidential candidate Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. do not pass this test.

To summarize his statements and those of his spokespersons: The current lead enjoyed by the Liberal Party’s vice presidential candidate Leni Robredo is suspicious because Marcos Jr. began the quick count with a head start and at one point even had a 1-million-vote edge over Robredo. Robredo’s suspicious surge began when there was a supposed tweaking of the script that runs the transparency server sometime during election night.

Other arguments offered by his supporters include one from statistics: The linear progression of the votes for Robredo did not follow a random pattern. There was also one based on, well, denial: Who is this obscure Robredo, and where did her votes come from?

A whole army of statisticians and data experts has emerged to debunk the analysis offered by academics Antonio Contreras and David Yap, who do not hide their support for Marcos Jr. Simply put, their reading is wrong because they assume randomness where there is none. The obscurity argument doesn’t work either; Robredo was in virtual ties with Marcos Jr. in the last three preelection surveys—and in fact campaigned in about twice as many areas as he did. The 1-million-vote edge is explained by the fact—available to many on election night—that the early transmissions were from Marcos bailiwicks. As for the supposed script tweak: This can be simply resolved by stopping the main and transparency servers in the presence of observers and comparing the contents.

What Marcos Jr. should have done is show his copies of the election returns, and compare these with the tallies he suspects are fraudulent. He hasn’t done that, and we wonder why. Instead he has called on the Comelec to stop the quick count (required by both law and equity). As that classic TV commercial from the 1980s spoofing the lack of proof phrased it: Where’s the beef?

To Antonio Contreras re: Agot Isidro comments Oct 2016:

Does DLSU share your political views? Are you representing them?

I am certain DLSU will not appreciate YOU mentioning/dragging DLSU’s name into the mud with your personal opinions now made public.

If you were paid by the admin or have good connections with Marcos or Duterte, you’d do what you can to uplift them. This man’s intentions are obvious. Either that or he is genuinely stupid.

Na butthurt ka ba sa actions nya? He made a perfectly valid point. Students are looking for great teachers. Teachers are also looking for great students.

Check your privilege rich kid.

lumadlad ka na kase para di palaging bitter te.. 🙂 fb profile mo palang puno na ng selfie.. beking beki ah.. 🙂

Leave a Reply