School of Law and Governance

College of Law

Reflection Journal on Conflict

Sensitivity Seminar

Submitted to:
Dean Joan Largo

Submitted by:
Rochelle Ann P. Reyes
Student, EH 402
 Law students who are enrolled in the subject of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) were able to attend a seminar titled “Conflict Sensitivity
Seminar” which was held on January 26-27, 2019, 8:00 am to 6:00 pm. The
speaker for this event was Ceasar H. Villanueva. We began with questions
such as: “Is conflict normal in everyday life?”, “Does conflict creates its
own life cycle?”, “Can conflict escalate?” and “Is conflict best managed,
resolved or transformed?” These questions made me formulate my own
questions and these are: Why do we need to be conflict sensitive? Is
understanding conflict really important? What is the importance of being
conflict sensitive? Can I apply the things that I will learn here in my
personal life in terms of handling conflicts? How is mediation different from
arbitration? Which is better? These are the questions I asked myself before
the seminar started. Before this seminar, I never thought understanding
conflict and being conflict sensitive is that important.

In this seminar, we were given a couple of activities for us to

understand better the discussion and for us to apply it. An application is the
best way to test our comprehension on a particular topic. In our first activity,
we were made to understand the meaning of the word “CONFLICT” and
made us think about words which are equivalent in our dialect or language.
Most of the members in our group are from the Visayas and there are some
who are from Luzon. Our group came up with the meaning which is in
“Bisaya” as compared to other groups who had their meanings in English.
What I have learned in this activity was that conflict can be viewed in two
ways: A challenge and a threat. Why? People came from different places
with different characters, personalities, and ways of upbringing. Each one of
us has different goals which could lead to conflict. As we socialize and meet
different people was will encounter different customs or beliefs. Conflict
may arise anytime and anywhere since people have incompatibilities and I
think a conflict exists in our daily lives. It is inevitable. Conflict is a way to
understand our differences, pave the way for a change. We need to face
conflicts for us to grow and understand other people. Again, it is not about
knowing who is right or who should win.

Another task given was to share with the group any conflict each of us
has or had for us to decide the pattern when conflict occurs, peaks and
disappears. Does conflict escalate? How? The story that I chose to share
with my group was the conflict I had with my sister which involves the rest
of the family. Our conflict was who will do all the chores, the cooking, and
the likes. They were once my responsibilities for I was the eldest among us
three and since our parents were working abroad. The conflict started when I
had to leave Manila to continue studying law. My sister did not want to take
those responsibilities for she is also a student who wanted to allow her time
for studying. We had a debate and there were times when it got too personal,
those things which should not be included in our issue came into the picture.

2
But we do not have much of a choice for she wanted me to continue my
studies in Cebu. In my story, at first, we were just ignoring that there was a
conflict between us and it only escalated when we had to make a decision.
After we were all able to share our stories, I have learned that we struggle
differently. We faced or currently facing different problems or conflicts.
Solved or unsolved. There is one common thing between all of our problems
and that is two sides of the story.

Which is better, to win or to solve the conflict? As a law student, we

are trained to know the law and understand the law. Is there really a
difference between winning a case and/or solving the issues of the parties?
Winning a case does not mean that the conflict between the parties was
solved. This seminar made me think about what will happen to the parties
after the courts decide in a case. Sometimes the court’s decision even if it is
already final will not fix the relationship of the parties involved. The parties
may settle their dispute in a legal manner but there are things that cannot be
fixed by the laws.

In another activity, we were given a paper which contains statements

that could help us reflect and assess our preferred conflict-management
style. My scores were as follows: 15 for yielding, 15 for Avoiding, 14 for
Compromising, 13 for Problem Solving and 12 for Forcing. The self-
assessment activity made me conscious that most of the time I do avoid or
yield when there is a conflict at hand compared to other students who got
problem-solving or compromising as their highest conflict-management
style. Avoiding or yielding will not fix the problem. I suppose as early as
now I have to adjust and alter my conflict-management style in order for me
to be a better mediator. I tend to surrender to the request of the other person
even if it would not result in what I wanted it to be. I tend to set aside my
needs or request for the conflict to end. No person is unemotional. Decisions
are based on emotions more often than logical. I also avoid having
discussions because I do not fancy arguing with people and I think it is a
waste of time. We will just quarrel and arguing without an impartial third
party will not fix or solve the problem. Again, quarreling is a waste of time
when it is mixed with heightened emotions.

The speaker asked us “what is our national flower?”, “our national

dress?”, and “how about the Philippine national food?” I know we are all
familiar with “lechon”. Now, having lechon as our national food, are we
even sensitive to our Muslim brothers and sisters? They are also
“FILIPINOS”. One nation, different beliefs.

3
 As for conflict-sensitivity, we must be transparent and respectful.
Transparency is a must because when people are not transparent such will
lead to misunderstanding and lack of trust. So conflicts between the parties
must be disclosed and they will know what to do and how the conflict will
be resolved. Respect is needed too because when you respect a person you
will not do anything to hurt the other party. You are sensitive to the person’s
feelings. Then there would be no violence.

Now, the task was to write all the words you could remember from the
words that we were able to see or read for a short period of time. I was not
able to read all of the words and since I am bad at remembering words or
terms I was only able to write 5 words luckily all of them were correct.
Some of my friends wrote words that are not included in the list. However,
they are related to the words that were flashed to us. It is not unusual for our
brain to think for the relativity or connection between things or in this case
words and there are instances that we will think that it is true or it exists.
Things can be viewed in different ways and sometimes it is also a cause of
why there is conflict. They may be both right just viewed from a different
perspective.

As to the tools in analyzing conflicts, these are ABC Triangle,

Historical Timeline, Conflict Tree, Onion/Iceberg, and Mapping
Stakeholders. These tools were used in our activity which made me think
that law students are also creative students. Such tools were to be applied in
a case. Our chosen case was “THE LION KING” compared to other groups
which were the Chi Ming Tsoi vs. Court of Appeals or the issue with regards
to “Angkas” or “Habal-habal” or simply our transportation system. Our
group applied the ABC Triangle and Violence Triangle, the Onion Ring and
Conflict Mapping. We made those who did not watch the movie understand
the Lion King and the conflict in the said story.

In comparing the types of approach in mediation, the transformative

and problem-solving mediation, I have discovered that they are different in
goals, response to conflict, assumptions about conflict, mediator’s role and
actions. In the transformative approach to mediation, it does not immediately
seek the solution or answer to the problem but classifying or identifying first
the issues of the parties involved. Then, letting the parties solve their own
issues and to have a settlement. As for problem-solving mediation, it focuses
on the solution to the problem which was the reason why it is also known as
“settlement-oriented” mediation. We had another activity to show that
people tend to use the problem-solving mediation rather than the
transformative. What happened in the first stage was that the parties were
asked about their stories and/or issues and during that stage, they are already
proposing their own solutions to the problem without identifying what their

4
main problem was which would result to an unsolved problem and also no
settlement can be attained in such situation. I realize that in order to solve
any problem people must recognize first what is really the main
issue/problem for the parties to think of a better solution. If the parties will
not do so, they will most probably end up with a wrong solution or worst an
unsolved problem.

Which should we prefer “arbitration”, “conciliation” or “mediation”?

In arbitration, there is an arbitrator who determines based on the arguments
and evidence presented by the parties while in conciliation, there is a
conciliator which assists, suggests and advises the parties to come up with
an agreement. In mediation, there is a mediator who assists but does not
impose solutions to the parties in resolving their differences. There are a set
of skills that a mediator must have or must embody. A mediator must know
how to paraphrase and reframe the words. We prepare in everything we do,
we must also prepare in mediation because there are phases of mediation.
All in all, this experience made me think that it is not easy to mediate.

As stated in the seminar, conflict is not equal to violence. There are

different ways to prevent violence from happening when there is a conflict.
Also, the parties must be prepared and should not be forced to resolve their
conflict. Forcing the parties could lead to much serious conflict and would
be harder to resolve or fix. Going back to the story I shared to my group, my
sister and I were able to resolve our conflict by the time we were both ready.
We tried to forcibly resolve it but we ended up hurting each other’s feelings
and made it worst. In my conflict, the outcome was one party prevails which
is me. I got to continue my education in Cebu and my sister is the one who
now has those responsibilities mentioned above. We did not compromise
since that set up probably will only last for a year.

Out of the five (5) Conflict Outcomes, I think I prefer compromise or

transcendence. In a compromise, both of the parties will be able to get
something which is fair for both of them. In transcendence, the thing they
are in conflict with would be transformed or evolved into a different thing so
that they could share. I think that in any of these two outcomes the parties
will be able to receive or enjoy their shares or part. It is a win-win situation
for the parties. As compared to one party prevails and/or flight, one party
will be prejudiced. I think it is unreasonable and unjust.

Again, Conflict is something people cannot avoid. There are a lot of

reasons why conflict is foreseeable but violence is something we can prevent
from happening. Since conflict is common in our existence in this world,
what we can do to at least prevent violence to happen. We, as rational

5
beings, must be sensitive to each other’s opinions, faith, differences,
cultures, traditions, belief, and customs. We must respect each other. If
Conflict can lead to violence, then people should be conflict sensitive. Ergo,
conflict sensitivity prevents violence.

After the seminar, we were asked to describe how we felt in one word.
Now, I am ending this reflection paper with the word: “APPRISED”.