When Theater Replaces Real Transparency: A Global Lesson in Election Governance

Transparency is a universally venerated pillar of electoral integrity. But when it becomes more about optics than being authentic, more performance than principle, it courts a backfire. Rather than building trust, performative transparency creates a false sense of oversight, lulling citizens into complacency, and conceals institutional rot.

In the Philippines, the chairman of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) is under fire for a procurement process riddled with controversy—making it a powerful case study in electoral governance. 

Chairman George Garcia. Source: Wikipedia/Comelec

The Philippine Case: What Went Wrong?

In a bid to create a perception of transparency, Chairman George Garcia orchestrated livestreams and media briefings covering its procurement of a new election system for the 2025 polls. But lawmakers and election watchdogs quickly saw through the performance and flagged irregularities in the procurement process.

Concerned groups raised alarms over the $310 million contract being awarded to newcomer Miru without competitive bidding. Beyond allegations of corruption, Miru’s technological failures have repeatedly disrupted elections and eroded public trust.

Even during the bidding process, Miru’s technology performed poorly in two different countries. In the Democratic Republic of Congo’s 2023 presidential elections, 45% of polling stations using Miru equipment experienced major malfunctions. The Carter Center flagged critical flaws in the voter registration kits, including thermal printers that smudged voter cards. In Iraq, Miru’s systems failed during both the 2018 and 2023 elections—70% of voting centers using its devices malfunctioned during special voting in 2023, requiring emergency manual counting.

Garcia’s efforts at transparency seemed to serve more as misdirection from the anomalies than genuine institutional accountability. As dissenting voices were ignored, public trust plummeted. Out of the camera view of the stage-managed transparency, a growing suspicion of corruption festered.

The chairman now faces multiple formal complaints which include a graft complaint alleging 61 million counts of cyberfraud during the 2025 elections, a graft suit by a congressman, accusing Garcia of violating procurement laws in awarding the $310 million contract to Miru Systems, and a disbarment petition before the Supreme Court citing a ₱300 million bribery allegation and political favoritism.

These cases point to a troubling reality: when transparency is only performed rather than practiced, accountability is undermined. 

Cameroon: Fake Observers, Fabricated Legitimacy

Lip-service legitimacy is being observed elsewhere around the world too. In Cameroon’s 2018 presidential election, the government boasted of international observers from Transparency International. But there was a catch—they never came. The illusion was only exposed after the narrative had circulated widely, reinforcing distrust in state-led transparency initiatives. 

Political Finance in France and Spain: Legal Compliance, Minimal Disclosure

While many EU member states claim to uphold financial transparency in politics, only 7 out of 27 countries mandate full pre-election disclosure of private donors. Nations like France and Spain still allow anonymity, even under mounting international scrutiny. This selective opacity chips away at the credibility of transparency efforts, revealing how compliance can mask concealment. 

The High Cost of Illusion

When institutions focus on looking transparent—through press conferences, staged demos, and curated narratives—they often distract from real structural flaws. This performative transparency misleads the public into believing systems are secure and fair, even when serious gaps remain.
 

According to research from the Electoral Integrity Project, countries with low authentic transparency suffer from lower voter turnout, increased corruption, and waning democratic trust.

True transparency isn't about putting on a show—it’s about structural openness, real-time accountability, and meaningful engagement with public concerns. Genuine transparency means conducting free, fair and competitive bidding, releasing full vendor evaluations and not just summaries and polished press briefings. It includes involving independent experts, civil society, and watchdog groups rather than staging tightly controlled stakeholder panels.

Real transparency also requires commissioning third-party technical audits instead of relying solely on internal demonstrations. It responds to legal complaints directly and substantively, rather than brushing them off as partisan attacks. In contrast, performative transparency is all optics, offering the appearance of openness without the substance.

Transparency must be more than a spectacle. In an age where disinformation, political apathy, and democratic backsliding are on the rise, authentic transparency is essential—not optional. It requires courage, institutional reform, and a commitment to face uncomfortable truths. Without it, democracy becomes less a system of accountability and more stagecraft.

And once trust is lost, no amount of theater can restore it.

Philippines’ Election Tech Woes Spark Concern

 

The Philippines, long regarded as a regional pioneer in election modernization, is now in the midst of a crisis that threatens to unravel years of progress. The 2025 national elections—plagued by widespread technical failures—have cast a shadow over the country’s hard-earned reputation.

The breakdown began at the very start of election day, when President Bongbong Marcos himself struggled to cast his vote as the automated counting machine repeatedly failed to scan his ballot. This scenario—machines rejecting ballots, malfunctioning printers, and stalled voting lines—was not an isolated case. As widely reported, similar incidents unfolded in thousands of precincts nationwide.

Local election watchdogs like LENTE and the PPCRV warned that the problems were not merely technical hiccups but signs of deeper systemic failures. Overvoting occurred on a large scale due to low-quality paper ballots and substandard pens that caused ink to bleed and marks to be misread. Many voters also reported discrepancies between their selections and the printed voter receipts (VVPATs).

As voting ended and vote-counting machines began transmitting results, media tech teams discovered that thousands of vote transmissions had been duplicated—corresponding to nearly five million votes. COMELEC later claimed it had corrected the issue in the early hours of the morning, but the lack of transparency around the fix only deepened public distrust.

The magnitude of these glitches is difficult to overstate. They have cast a dark cloud over the credibility of the electoral process and triggered widespread public outcry. What’s worse, this is not the first time Miru Systems—the technology provider responsible for this year’s infrastructure—has been implicated in election failures. In Iraq’s 2018 parliamentary elections, Miru’s technology failed so catastrophically that the Independent High Electoral Commission (IHEC) was forced to mandate a full nationwide recount. Today, echoes of that episode are reverberating in the Philippines, where some public officials, civil society organizations, and voters alike are starting to demand a similar audit.

Filipinos waited for hours under the punishing heat, queuing with hope and conviction that their vote would count. That trust now hangs in the balance. A transparent manual recount—as already requested by the PPCRV—is essential not only to confirm who truly won and lost, but also to begin restoring public faith in the democratic process. In parallel, election data must be made fully accessible to independent auditors.

The Philippines stands at a crossroads. The world is watching. These elections can still be redeemed—not through spin or silence, but through truth, transparency, and accountability. Without that, the country’s proud legacy of electoral innovation may be lost. But with courage and reform, it can emerge stronger—and once again lead by example.

Philippine lawmakers grill Miru over controversies surrounding the bidding process and its spotty track record

South Korean voting firm Miru Systems is grappling with mounting controversy following a recent $322 million contract with the Philippines’ Commission on Elections (Comelec) – the nation’s largest-ever polling deal.

The contract has triggered a series of investigations by both houses of Congress, prompted by vocal concerns from election oversight bodies and civil society organizations. These groups have highlighted numerous alleged irregularities within the procurement process, notably that Miru was the only company to submit a bid, supported by the Comelec's previous actions to evade competitors.

Central to the dispute is Miru’s proposition of a prototype voting machine, a submission that Philippine law prohibits. Critics have raised concerns over a potential contravention of the Automated Election Law, which mandates the deployment of systems with a demonstrated track record of success in previous elections. There is unease surrounding Miru's technology, as it amalgamates Optical Mark Reader (OMR) and Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) components, which have not been jointly utilized in past elections, casting doubts on their reliability and legality.

Furthermore, international reports have surfaced detailing issues with Miru’s technology in other countries. Incidences such as faulty voter ID cards disrupting elections in Congo and significant machine malfunctions reported in both Congo and Iraq have only fueled skepticism.

Miru contracts in the Democratic Republic of Congo have been under increased scrutiny after a report by the Center for Research in Public Finance and Local Development, funded by the European Union, revealed malpractices linked to the Congo's Independent National Electoral Commission (CENI) and Miru Systems, including corruption and signs of money laundering. The report highlighted that Miru secured nine contracts in the DR Congo worth over $321 million, with just one undergoing a competitive tender. Notably, the electoral commission procured excess voter cards and ballots and prematurely classified functional voter registration kits as obsolete, leading to unnecessary increased procurement costs and casting doubt on the integrity of contract allocations.

Even worst, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned three senior CENI officials ‘following persistent corruption’. According to the US Treasury Office, Congolese election officials inflated by as much as $100 million the costs for the electronic voting machine contract (signed with Miru) with the intent to use surplus funds for personal enrichment, bribes, and campaign costs to fund the election campaign of Kabila's candidate.

“(…) CENI officials, awarded an election-related contract and doubled the award amount on the understanding that the winning company [Miru] would award the extra funds to a DRC company controlled by CENI leadership.”

As the Philippine Congress delves into the depths of Miru Systems' controversial multi-million dollar contract and the company's questionable track record, concerns raised by both domestic and international entities cast a long shadow over the upcoming 2025 elections. These findings underscore the critical need for transparency, due diligence, and adherence to the rule of law in election-related procurements—a call echoed by vigilant lawmakers and committed civil society advocates. The journey towards a free, fair, and credible election stands at a crossroads, with the integrity of democratic processes in the Philippines, and potentially in other nations, hinging on the outcomes of these rigorous investigations.

Election Modernization in the Philippines at Crossroads

 

The Philippine Commission on Elections (Comelec) made a very risky and surprising move on November 29, when it banned its long-time technology provider Smartmatic from bidding on the 2025 contract for election technology in the Philippines. The move could spell the end to one of the most successful examples of election modernization in the Asia Pacific region.

Comelec’s new leadership has chosen to sever ties with Smartmatic, despite the company's longstanding role improving Filipino elections and the integrity of the outcomes, which have held up to every audit and legal challenge. Petitions by political activists calling for Smartmatic's disqualification have been dismissed by Comelec, which has cited a lack of evidence to justify such measures.

In the weeks preceding the rulings, Comelec Chairman Garcia firmly stated that the committee would only consider disqualification if substantial evidence was introduced in a legal setting. On September 22, Garcia affirmed, "The presumption of innocence prevails. We will meticulously observe the progression of this matter, particularly the nature and substance of the evidence presented in court.” Additionally, in a PhilStar interview, the Chairman underscored, "The Comelec cannot disqualify on the basis of speculation, rumors, or mere allegations." Despite the absence of such evidence and the lack of a judicial proceeding, Comelec nevertheless moved forward with the disqualification of Smartmatic.

Responding to the disqualification, Smartmatic pointed out that Comelec failed to follow the standard legal process for disqualification and never gave the company a chance to prove its innocence. “This ruling is made without any legal basis and appears to be an excuse for what was clearly a pre-determined decision to exclude Smartmatic from the bid, irrespective of merit. Our reputation and goodwill have been unjustly besmirched and the right to join the bidding withheld unjustly,” reads the company’s statement.

Since its first participation in Philippine elections in the Mindanao province in 2008, Smartmatic has continuously supplied election technology and services to Comelec. The company won open bids for subsequent national and local elections from 2010 through the most recent elections in 2022. During this period, the country saw marked improvements in both efficiency and accuracy, as well as citizen safety from post-election violence.

Barring further explanation from Comelec, the committee’s decision is curious and may, indeed, backfire on it. Comelec’s choice was, supposedly, driven by its desire to maintain the integrity of its processes and elections. Yet by sidestepping its own rules and due legal process, Comelec is opening itself to those who would question its integrity and thus, the integrity of the elections in its charge. At a time when the committee is being heavily scrutinized for yielding to political and economic pressures, choosing to circumvent due process seems to be an odd choice that may irreparably harm the cause of election integrity Comelec works so hard to protect.

Next up for the Philippines: automated grassroots polls

 

Photo courtesy of ABS-CBN News

 

Since 2010, the Commission of Elections (Comelec) has successfully used electronic counting for national and local elections in the Philippines. This time, the poll body has set its sights on bringing the benefits of automation down to elections at the grassroots.

The hyperlocal polls, which go by the official name of Barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan Elections (BSKE), is set for October 30 of this year. Under the law, the BSKE is to be held every three years to choose grassroots leaders in 42,027 villages (barangays) across the country. Currently, the BSKE is still conducted manually and is plagued by problems of slow count, human error, and fraud.

The BSKE modernization initiative kicked off recently with mock elections in three pilot areas in and around the capital city of Manila. The successful exercise saw the return to active service of the familiar vote counting machines (VCMs), following a massive nationwide deployment in the 2022 general elections.

During the mock elections, Comelec Chairman George Erwin Garcia noted how automating the BSKE would speed up the process and make results available an hour after the polls close. Manual count is known to take days or even weeks to finish.

E-voting is also expected to reduce the risk of fraud and errors hounding BSKE. While manual elections are vulnerable to vote padding miscounting of votes and other anomalies, automated elections are more secure and reliable, as the votes are cast and counted electronically.

In addition, automated elections prove to be cost-effective in the long run, as they require fewer personnel and resources. The savings brought on by automation should be a welcome development for the national government.

Moreover, the automation of the grassroots polls is seen to immensely benefit electoral board members. While manual elections can be a long and tiring process for poll workers, who often must work for up to 24 hours straight, automated elections are much less demanding on election workers, as they only must operate the voting machines and do not have to manually count the votes.

The citizen watchdog Namfrel (National Movement for Free Elections), which was present as an observer in the mock elections gave its imprimatur on the initiative saying that automating the BSKE is “doable.”

The Comelec’s initiative to automate the BSKE represents a major step forward in upgrading the transparency and efficiency of the grassroots polls in the Philippines. With the benefits of automation trickling down to the most basic unit of government, the Philippines bolsters its standing as a primary reference for election modernization.