Overview

The barangays are the smallest political subdivisions in the Philippines. The Katarungang Pambarangay (KP) or Barangay Justice System (BJS) is an alternative, community-based mechanism for dispute resolution of conflicts between members of the same community. The BJS provides a venue for disputing parties to search for a mutually acceptable solution. Other members of the communities act as intermediaries, facilitating the discussion of possible solutions. The BJS formalized the Filipino tradition to seek help of community elders or tribe leaders in resolving disputes between members of the same community, and uses the Punong Barangay (highest elected official in a barangay) and the Lupon members (committee of respected community members). It is only when the BJS has failed to resolve the dispute that the parties are allowed to bring their case to court.

Who can access it?

Individual residents of Barangay can file a complaint to their Punong Barangay. If the parties are from different barangays, the dispute will be settled in the barangay at the choice of the complainant. Cooperatives or peoples organizations can go directly to court without mediation or conciliation.

How does it work?

Mediation A complaint is filed in the Lupon (committee) at a minimal filing fee. The Punong Barangay facilitates the mediation process and explains the process, objectives and rules of the mediation. Each party is given time to explain their point of view. If no settlement is reached following the mediation, the parties can try to resolve their dispute through conciliation. Conciliation The conciliators (Pangkat Tagapagkasundo) are known and respected by both parties in the dispute, and are constituted by the Punong Barangay from the Lupon. The three members of the Pangkat are chosen by the parties. The Pangkat shall hear both parties and explore the possibilities for amicable settlement. The amicable settlement reached

in conciliation has the force and effect of a final judgment of a court and can be enforced within 6 months from the date of settlement by filing a motion in court. If no settlement is reached, the parties can use a certification to file action for filing a case in court. Arbitration Arbitration can take place at any stage of the proceedings, as long as both parties agree in writing to abide by the arbitration award of the Lupon or Pangkat.

Enforcement
If a settlement is reached through either mediation, conciliation or arbitration, and the party has not complied with the settlement or arbitration award, the Punong Barangay executes the settlement by taking possession of sufficient personal property of the party obliged, which can be sold and the proceeds applied to the amount.

Appeal
An amicable settlement has force and effect of a final judgment of a court after ten days from the date of the settlement, unless a protest or repudiation of the settlement is made. Only when the BJS has failed to resolve the dispute, can the parties bring their case to court.
http://accessfacility.org/barangay-justice-system-katarungang-pambarangay
uesday, May 18, 2010

Legal Procedures 03: Katarungang Pambarangay

(Note: Please surf to thecomplete list of available PDFs on legal procedures in criminal and civil cases.) The Katarungang Pambarangay or the barangay justice system is governed by Sections 399 to 422 of the Local Government Code. It has helped lessen the burden of our courts by settling at the barangay level conflicts and disputes between residents of the same barangay. Please take note of these issues regarding barangay justice: [1] Lawyers are not allowed to appear in barangay hearings. [2] Even if the parties in dispute are residents of the same barangay, they do not necessarily have to go through the Katarungang Pambarangay. Section 408 of the Local Government Code enumerates the exceptions where the parties can go straight to court or to the fiscals office. [3] If there has been an arbitration award or amicable settlement, and one party does not comply, the other party can file with the Municipal or Metropolitan Trial Court a petition for the execution of such settlement or award (Section 417). Although the Lupon has the authority to execute such arbitration award or amicable settlement, some barangay officials refuse to do so. Their reason is politics; they do not want to antagonize people who might vote against them in the next barangay elections. [4] Despite the use of the term justice, there really is no such thing as a barangay court. The barangay officials who compose the Lupong Tagapamayap or the Pangkat ng Tagakapagsundo are not judges. One of my former students told me that a barangay captain in Dasmarinas, Cavite

obligates everyone to call him Justice. One of my friends who got involved in a dispute in a Taguig City barangay told me that the head of the Lupon threatened him that his complaint will be dismissed for lack of merit. The only instance that the Lupon or Pangkat acts like a court (weighing evidence, hearing testimonies, deciding on the merits, etc.) is when the parties in dispute agree to arbitration. Differences among conciliation, mediation and arbitration The article Arbitration, Mediation and Conciliation: differences and similarities from an International and Italian business perspective by Alessandra Sgubini, Mara Prieditis & Andrea Marighetto provides a clear discussion on the differences among conciliation, mediation and arbitration: Conciliation and mediation both look to maintain an existing business relationship and to rekindle a lost balance of power between two parties. These concepts are sometimes used as synonyms, but they do indeed vary substantially in their procedures. In mediation, the mediator controls the process through different and specific stages: introduction, joint session, caucus, and agreement, while the parties control the outcome. By contrast, in conciliation the conciliator may not follow a structured process, instead administering the conciliation process as a traditional negotiation, which may take different forms depending on the case. Arbitration is an ADR (alternative dispute resolution) method where the disputing parties involved present their disagreement to one arbitrator or a panel of private, independent and qualified third party arbitrators. The arbitrator(s) determine the outcome of the case. While it may be less expensive and more accessible than trial, the arbitration process has well-defined disadvantages. Some of disadvantages include the risk losing, formal or semi-formal rules of procedure and evidence, as well as the potential loss of control over the decision after transfer by the parties of decision-making authority to the arbitrator. By employing arbitration, the parties lose their ability to participate directly in the process. In addition, parties in arbitration are confined by traditional legal remedies that do not encompass creative, innovative, or forward-looking solutions to business disputes.