REPORT IN ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE

RESOLUTION

Submitted by: Carmela Paola R. Dumlao

Submitted to: Atty. Alma Lanzo

1 | Page

OVERVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a collection of

processes used for the purpose of resolving conflict or disputes informally
and confidentially such as mediation, conciliation and arbitration. ADR
provides alternatives to traditional processes, such as grievances and
complaints; however, it does not displace those traditional processes. ADR
is generally voluntary. It empowers and enables the participating parties to
develop and seek mutually acceptable solutions, which they choose to
meet their needs. Generally, it uses a neutral third party to help the parties
communicate, develop ideas and resolve the dispute.

Some reasons for using ADR are that it is faster, less costly, easier,
less formality involved, less confrontational or adversarial, it encourages
creativity and searching for practical solutions, it avoids the unpredictability
involved when decisions are rendered as a result of the traditional dispute
resolution mechanisms. The ADR process usually results in improved
communications between disputing parties and is therefore better for
ongoing relationships, increases workplace morale and can make you feel
better about coming to work, results in participant satisfaction, solutions
tend to be durable or long lasting since they have the buy in of all parties

2 | Page

involved, publicity is avoided and most importantly, the parties retain control
of the outcome. YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE by using ADR since all
statutory entitlements remain in tact.

THE KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY LAW

One of the known Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanism in the

Philippines is the

Katarungang Pambarangay or the barangay justice

system which 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. In Katarungang Pambarangay Law the following rules are
observed:

[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

3 | Page

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. 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.

Under the law, no dispute covered by the Katarungang Pambarangay

Law may be filed directly in court or any other government office for
adjudication unless there has been a confrontation of the parties before the
Lupon Chairman or the Pangkat and no conciliation or settlement has been
reached as certified by the lupon secretary or pangkat secretary as attested
to by the lupon chairman or pangkat chairman. It is important to stress that
the restriction against direct recourse is not only with the courts but also
before any adjudicative agency of the government. Thus, a civil action filed
in court or a criminal complaint filed with the public prosecutor of a covered

4 | Page

case that has not undergone prior barangay conciliation, may be

suspended or dismissed until the condition has been met.

The evidence showing compliance with the condition required is the

Certificate to File Action issued by the proper Katarungang Pambarangay
officials which is usually attached to the complaint. Where a complaint is
filed in court without undergoing the required Katarungang Pambarangay
conciliation, the case may be dismissed on the ground of lack of a cause
of action or prematurity

Way back January 2011, I was appointed as Barangay Secretary of

Lucap, Alaminos City, Pangasinan til May of the same year. During my
tenure as such, I have also served as Secretary of the Lupon
Tagapamayapa pursuant to the mandate of the Local Government Code, to
wit:

SEC. 403. Secretary of the Lupon. - The barangay secretary shall

concurrently serve as the secretary of the lupon. He shall record the results
of mediation proceedings before the punong barangay and shall submit a
report thereon to the proper city or municipal courts. He shall also receive
and keep the records of proceedings submitted to him by the various
conciliation panels.

5 | Page

As such, I have encountered several cases and attended conciliation

and mediation proceedings. One of the cases I have encountered is a case
whereby:

SAMPLE CASE

On several occasions respondent purchased on credit various articles

of merchandise from the complainant store all valued at P7, 000.00.
Respondent failed to pay despite repeated demands. The complainant
brought the matter before the Punong Barangay and the latter set the case
for hearing, but private respondents failed to appear. When the case was
again set for hearing, the parties appeared but they failed to reach an
amicable settlement.

Upon filing the Complaint before the Barangay, the Complainant paid
the filing fee/docket fee the amount of which depends on the Ordinance
promulgated by the Barangay. If the Complainant is indigent, he is exempt
from paying such.

6 | Page

After docketing the complaint, the Punong Barangay summoned the

parties and set the case for conciliation proceedings. During the first two (2)
scheduled hearing, the respondent failed to appear. On the third one, he
appeared but nevertheless denied that he owed any amount to the
complainant. According to him, the debt should have been set off to his
services to the complainant as mechanic of the latters passenger boat.
The Punong Barangay started convincing the parties to amicably settle in
order that their dispute will no longer reach the court because it would more
costly. However, the efforts of the Punong Barangay to settle the dispute
proved futile. Such having failed and since no amicable settlement has
been reached, the Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo was constituted with the
end in view of exploring all possibilities of amicable settlement.

In this case, the efforts of the Punong Barangay to mediate the

dispute between the parties having failed, the Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo
was constituted for purposes of settling the matter on a mediation
proceeding.

During the mediation proceeding before the Pangkat, the parties both
appeared after having been summoned. The Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo
is composed of three (3) members coming from the Lupon Tagapamayapa.
It is composed of the Chairman and two (2) members. This prompted the

7 | Page

issuance of the following Certification to File Action to be signed by the

Lupon Secretary, and the Pangkat Chairman and members who conducted
the mediation proceedings.

After the Certification to File Action has been issued in favour of the
complainant, he may now file an action in court.

8 | Page