Here is what the Chief Justice said: "I don’t know their plans. Maybe they need to explain what they mean by pre-bidding and how this will affect the pending case…The Ombudsman’s decision is still being appealed to the Supreme Court."

Does this mean that nothing can happen until the previous automation that was thrown out by the previous Supreme Court, mainly on the belief that if the Automated Counting Machines (ACM) that the Comelec bought had been used in the 2004 elections, Gloria Arroyo would have lost, has finally been settled?

One realizes that the SC must continue to pretend that it did the right thing in 2004; but, even granting that it was the right decision then, why not just allow these machines to be used in 2010 because there is really nothing wrong with the machines and what was purchased by the Comelec in 2004?

Even accepting that there was something wrong with the purchase, what was wrong with it had nothing to do with the capability of these machines to automate our elections. Each machine passed the scrutiny of the Department of Science and Technology. (DOST) That ought to count for something.

The SC must accept that while it has the last word in legal matters, it ought to be the DOST that should have the last word on matters concerning its expertise just as the PNP ought to be believed when it speaks about police matters and procedures.

Of course, one of the reasons for the SC not to allow the machines to be used may be that the decision penned by a former Chief Justice went so far as to say that the machines would not work well.

Clearly, though, that now gone-for-good CJ was speaking though his nose or through his hat (depending on your choice of expression). Maybe, he was just speaking to save Gloria’s re-election that could not have survived an honest count.

What the SC ought to do is to call the DOST experts back to the stand to tell them what the department concluded from its extensive testing of the ACMs. Then, the SC ought to have a demonstration of how the machine really works. Then, perhaps, having fully investigated the matter, the SC can rule with its head rather than its emotions or its politics on whether these machines can save our elections. I sincerely believe that these ACMs will work and work well and that all that the SC needs to do is to give the ACMs a chance to show what they can do for our elections.

Right now, we are paying millions in storage costs and there really is no way for the Comelec to get the supplier to return the money that it was paid. Why should the supplier return the Comelec’s money when it had a contract with the Comelec that stated that the Comelec would pay for the machines, if these passed the tests to be conducted by the DOST. The machines passed these tests with flying colors and they were delivered and accepted.

Thus, why should they return the money just because the SC ruled that these ACMs would not work and that the company that the Comelec contracted did not have the capability to deliver all the machines which were in fact fully delivered with each ACM passing the DOST’s scrutiny.

Only the SC can fix its own bum decision on this case. It is about time that it looked into this one more time, this time without the politics of the 2004 elections!

***

We have a letter: "I fully agree with your position that the Lopez company drove the Solar channel to move out of Skycable.

"I recall a few years back when major channels like ESPN, National Geographic, Star movies, Star World, among others moved out of Skycable due to non-payment, thus prompting thousands of subscribers to subscribe to Global Destiny cable. With the threat of imminent collapse, the Lopez-owned did the most unethical things – they paid the Star group channels (National Geographic, Star, ESPN et al) all their arrears including increase in subscription but on one very evil condition, which is for the Star group to move out of Global Destiny cable. The adverse impact of this monopolistic decision is such that Global Destiny found itself barely surviving.

"Now I know that former president Marcos may have been right after all in putting the Lopezes in their rightful place.

"Thanks and more power." - June Bamba

***

Keeping politics out of this, Jun, I wonder why the government agencies that regulate cable television have nothing to say when a cable provider – which ideally would allow everyone that wants to get on its list of programs to do so – is also allowed to be a provider of content. This is unfair to GMA Channel 7 and the others that compete with the Lopez’s Channel 2 and its other channels. Now, I also suspect that the Lopezes are favoring "Balls" and the other channels that they now have on the Skycable line-up in lieu of those that Solar was providing because they have some sort of tie-up with them. Perhaps, they tried to take over Solar and Solar resisted which may be why they took Solar out of their line-up. They are not even fair enough to allow their own choices to compete with those that their customers actually like.

Why are the Lopezes being allowed to do as they please when, in Skycable, they are only a provider and ought to give their viewers as wide a choice that can be given?

As a cable provider, they ought to give their customer what these viewers like and not what the Lopezes want to us to watch. Unfortunately, there seems to be no recourse for those of us who are being victimized by this powerful family.

You are right that what Marcos did to this family is now looking more and more reasonable.