The similarities lies in RA9369. Both complaints wants the SC to rule in favor of their case as per RA9369.
The difference is that the "Roque" case had a crucial argument, but SC ruled against it. The "CenPeg" case has no crucial argument, and it will be interesting what the SC will rule in this case. On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 1:05 PM, Pablo Manalastas <[email protected]> wrote: > --- On Thu, 10/15/09, Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The similarity between these two >> cases is that the contract was argued >> as violating among others RA9369 and should be annulled. >> And this is >> the similarity I was referring to, RA9369. > > Please read the CenPEG petition here: > > http://www.cenpeg.org/POL%20PARTIES%20AND%20ELECTIONS/OCT%202009/Petition%20for%20Mandamus.pdf > > Can you tell me where in the petition "the contract was argued as violating > among others RA9369 and should be annulled"? In the petition all that CenPEG > is asking is for COMELEC to release the source code, so that CenPEG, using > volunteers from PLUG, Ateneo, UP, DLSU, etc can do a source code review. > > You OBVIOUSLY have not read the petition, yet you make wrong and misleading > accusations of similarity. Please refrain from doing this misinformation, > because that is intellectual dishonesty. I am referring to the action, not > the person. > > ~Pablo Manalastas~ > > >> >> Now, the two cases differ as follows, >> >> The lack of "Pilot Testing" was crucial in that >> case. It was crucial because "Pilot Testing" cannot be >> substituted by >> any other process to achieve the specific purpose for which >> it was >> intended. And yet the case was lost and decided in favor of >> the Comelec. >> The SC has ruled that on balance there were no compelling >> evidence >> to rule in favor of "Roque". >> >> On the other hand, "Source Code Review" is not crucial to >> the integrity >> of the election because it is not the only way that the >> integrity of the >> election can be assured. There are other ways as the RA9369 >> has >> implied. >> >> But this case is before the SC, so let's wait and see. >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:16 AM, Pablo Manalastas >> <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > --- On Wed, 10/14/09, Oscar Plameras <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> >> As a matter of interest there was a previous >> court >> >> decision on a similar matter which was ruled by >> SC >> >> in favor of the Comelec. >> > >> > The "Harry Roque vs COMELEC-Smartmatic" is not a >> similar matter to the >> > "CenPEG vs COMELEC" case. The only thing similar is >> that both cases >> > were brought to the Supreme Court. >> > >> > In the former case, Roque wanted the contract between >> COMELEC and Smartmatic-TIM declared null and void on several >> grounds, including questions on the 60-40% ownership, >> Smartmatic's control of our election, and the lack of pilot >> testing before full computerization. The Supreme court ruled >> in favor of COMELEC. >> > >> > In the latter case, CenPEG wants COMELEC to release >> the source code of the election programs (it is a mandamus >> petition), the source code that COMELEC has already >> committed to release to CenPEG in its own en-banc >> resolution. The Supreme Court still has to decide this >> case. >> > >> > Please verify your facts before making such careless >> statements, because such careless statements offend the >> sensibilities of some people in this list. >> > >> > ~Pablo Manalastas~ > _________________________________________________ > Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List > http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug > Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph > _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List http://lists.linux.org.ph/mailman/listinfo/plug Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
