Media on Elections and Violence 2016
 |
|
|
Methodology Framework of monitoring: Regional Monitor
Team Leaders assigned by CMFR: Melvin Gascon (Northern Luzon) National monitor CMFR research staff monitored the reportage in national media (media organizations based in Metro Manila). These include nine broadsheets, four television networks, two news channels and select online news websites: (See matrix on Page 8) CMFR staff compared national coverage with regional reports provided by the team leader and noted the gaps and weaknesses in the media coverage in the Manila-based national media. Time Frame The period monitored was the official campaign period on February up to the week of May 9 election ending on May 16. Reports filed and published during this period which identified victims or assailants as involved in campaign or known to be supporters of one or another candidate are included in the count. CMFR directed monitors to begin coverage from the official campaign period as tensions can rise even during the campaign. It also directed the teams to extend monitor if they thought it necessary to refer to incidents during the filing of certificates of candidacy (COC) or periods of special registration. Some monitor teams however included incidents in 2015. Terms and Definitions Election-Related Violence (ERV) The International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) defines electoral violence as any harm or threat of harm to any person or property involved in election process or the process itself, during the election period. This can be “any random or organized act or threat to intimidate, physically harm, blackmail or abuse a political stakeholder in seeking to delay, or to determine or delay or otherwise influence an electoral process.” (Fischer 2002) What gives rise to electoral violence? Jeff Fischer wrote “It is when an electoral process is perceived as unfair or unresponsive, or corrupt that its political legitimacy is compromised and stakeholders are motivated to go outside the established norms to activate their objectives.” But such violence can still affect elections that are largely free and fair as both elections and violence present themselves as useful in the achievement of political objectives. PNP’s definition of Election-Related Incident (ERI) or ERV (2016) Previous criteria for a case to be considered an ERI: It must contain at least three elements: 1) it happened during the election period; 2) the parties involved may be government officials, political candidates, their families, or supporters; and 3) the incident disrupted the electoral process and create tension in a particular area. But Supt. Gilbert Gorero, spokesperson of the PNP in Western Visayas, said the ERIs are crime incidents occurring within the election period “which could affect or disrupt the electoral proceedings or create a form of political tension that could eventually upset the electoral process.” The mere involvement of candidates or supporters in crime incident does not automatically categorize the incident as on ERI. Nor does the presence of New People’s Army rebels or other threat groups in an area automatically make a city or municipality as an Election Watchlist Area (EWA). The categorization is stricter and narrower compared to previous elections. This more restrictive definition was noted also by monitors in Luzon and Mindanao. Election Watch Area (EWA) The PNP also declares certain areas as EWAs or hotspots. These are announced to the media and may cause increase in support of troops to the area. EWAs are those that have a history of intense partisan political rivalry, have past incidents that are politically-motivated and election-related, have presence of threat groups such as Abu Sayyaf Group, Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters and private army groups of influential politicians, and have a proliferation of firearms in a certain town, municipality or city (PNP).
|
|
Comments are closed.