Professional Documents
Culture Documents
JDR & CAM Revised Guidelines
JDR & CAM Revised Guidelines
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART ONE
GENERAL PROVISIONS AND COVERAGE
PART TWO
COURT-ANNEXED MEDIATION
Procedure
Sanctions
Duration of mediation proceedings in the PMCO
Suspension of Periods
Settlement
1
PART THREE
JUDICIAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION (JDR)
Mandate
Procedure
Sanctions
Duration of JDR Proceedings
Suspension of periods
Settlement
Pre-trial proper
Trial and Judgment
PART FOUR
COMMON PROVISIONS FOR CAM AND JDR
Confidentiality
Role of Lawyers in Mediation and JDR proceedings
PART FIVE
SC-PHILJA-PMC MEDIATION TRUST FUND
PART SIX
THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER OFFICE (PMCO)
AND MEDIATION CENTER UNITS
2
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
SUPREME COURT
Manila
PART ONE
1
Consolidation entailed the integration of the original guidelines separately governing Court-Annexed
Mediation (CAM) and Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR), together with all their respective amendments
and revisions into a single consolidated guidelines that will supplant said earlier issuances that are in
conflict or inconsistent with these consolidated guidelines.
3
GENERAL PROVISIONS AND COVERAGE
4
Simply stated, court diversion is a three-stage process.
The first stage is the Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM) where
the judge refers the parties to the Philippine Mediation Center
(PMC) for the mediation of their dispute by trained and
accredited mediators.
5
compromise shall not extinguish the public action for
the imposition of the legal penalty.”
2
The English Utilitarian posits that of the 3 variables, severity of penalty is the least important.
3
Article 9, in relation to Article 25, Revised Penal Code.
4
The Probation Law, Act No. 4221, as amended.
5
DOJ mediation program.
6
In contrast, the penalties classified under the Revised
Penal Code as afflictive and capital 6 are explicit that their
purpose is punishment. Probation is denied to convicts who
are imposed said afflictive penalties, thereby showing that
isolation from society through imprisonment is necessary for
the protection of society. Thus, the imposition of afflictive
punishment for grave offenses is surely the underlying basis
for achieving the principle of deterrence, not only of the person
punished but also of the general public, through the principle
of exemplarity.
6
Article 25 of the RPC categorizes these penalties as those punishable with prision mayor, reclusion
temporal, reclusion perpetua and death (6 years and 1 day, 20 years and life imprisonment to death). See
Table of Penalties under Article 76.
7
Summary Report of Cases for 2006 shows that only 108,855 civil cases were pending at the end of the
period, while 524,685 criminal cases were similarly pending.
8
R.A. No. 7691 expanded the jurisdiction of the first level courts to crimes punishable by imprisonment
not exceeding 6 years, irrespective of the amount of fine.
9
Section 32 (2), BP 129, The Judiciary Reorganization Act of 1980.
7
(1) All civil cases and the civil liability of
criminal cases covered by the Rule on
Summary Procedure, including the
civil liability for violation of B.P. 22,
except those which by law may not be
compromised;
10
Chapter 7, Local Government Code of 1991, R.A. No. 7160, essentially re-enacts the Katarungang
Pambarangay Law with some revisions and, therefore, is referred to as the Revised KB Law.
8
and original jurisdiction granted to
the first level courts under Section
33, par. (1) of the Judiciary
Reorganization Act of 1980;11
11
A.M. No. 08-9-10-SC-PHILJA-Re: Guidelines to Implement Mediation in the Regional Trial Courts Acting
as Appellate Courts in Appeals from First Level Courts approved by the Court En Banc on 10 February 2009
12
Ibid.
13
Ibid.
14
Ibid.
9
The following cases shall not be referred to CAM
and JDR:
10
PART TWO
Procedure
12
determine their respective real interests in the
dispute. Thereafter, another joint conference may
be held to consider various options that may
resolve the dispute through reciprocal
concessions and on terms that are mutually
beneficial to both the parties.
Sanctions
13
Upon justifiable cause duly proved in the hearing called
on the motion to reconsider filed by the absent party,
concurred in by the concerned mediator, the sanctions
imposed may be lifted or set aside in the sound discretion of
the referring judge.
Suspension of periods
Settlement
14
appropriate action of the court, without waiting for resolution
of the unsettled part.
15
PART THREE
I. Mandate
II. Procedure
Judicial proceedings shall be divided into two stages:
(1) from the filing of a complaint to the conduct of CAM and
JDR during the pre-trial stage, and (2) pre-trial proper to trial
and judgment. The judge to whom the case has been
originally raffled, who shall be called the JDR Judge, shall
preside over the first stage. The judge, who shall be called the
trial judge, shall preside over the second stage.
At the initial stage of the pre-trial conference, the JDR
judge briefs the parties and counsels of the CAM and JDR
processes. Thereafter, he issues an Order of Referral of the
case to CAM and directs the parties and their counsels to
proceed to the PMCU bringing with them a copy of the Order of
Referral. The JDR judge shall include in said Order, or in
another Order, the pre-setting of the case for JDR not earlier
than forty-five (45) days from the time the parties first
16
personally appear at the PMCU so that JDR will be conducted
immediately if the parties do not settle at CAM.
All incidents or motions filed during the first stage
shall be dealt with by the JDR judge. If JDR is not conducted
because of the failure of the parties to appear, the JDR judge
may impose the appropriate sanctions and shall continue with
the proceedings of the case.
If the parties do not settle their dispute at CAM, the
parties and their counsels shall appear at the preset date
before the JDR judge, who will then conduct the JDR process
as mediator, neutral evaluator and/or conciliator in order to
actively assist and facilitate negotiations among the parties for
them to settle their dispute. As mediator and conciliator, the
judge facilitates the settlement discussions between the parties
and tries to reconcile their differences. As a neutral evaluator,
the judge assesses the relative strengths and weaknesses of
each party's case and makes a non-binding and impartial
evaluation of the chances of each party's success in the case.
On the basis of such neutral evaluation, the judge persuades
the parties to a fair and mutually acceptable settlement of their
dispute.
The JDR judge shall not preside over the trial of the
case15 when the parties did not settle their dispute at JDR.
III. Courts
1. Multiple Sala Court - If the case is not resolved during
JDR, it shall be raffled to another branch for the pre trial
proper16 up to judgment.
15
Parties will be more spontaneous once they are assured that the JDR judge will not be the one to try the
case. This is so because, the JDR judge may have elicited confidential information that may create bias and
partiality that could affect the judgment.
16
Rule 18, Section 2 paragraphs b,c,d,e,f,g,and i,
17
For cases with pending applications for restraining
orders/preliminary injunctions, the judge to whom the case
was raffled shall rule on the said applications. During the
pre-trial stage, the judge refers the case to CAM, but if the
parties do not settle at CAM, the case will be raffled to
another branch for JDR. If the parties do not settle at JDR,
the case will be returned to the branch that ruled on the
applications for the pre-trial proper and up to judgment.17
2. Single Sala Court. – Unless otherwise agreed upon as
provided below, the JDR proceedings will be conducted by
the judge of the pair court, if any, otherwise, by the judge
of the nearest court as determined by the concerned
Executive Judge. The JDR proceedings shall be conducted
at the station where the case was originally filed. The result
of the JDR proceedings shall be referred to the court of
origin for appropriate action, e.g. approval of the
compromise agreement, trial, etc.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, before the
commencement of the JDR proceedings, the parties may
file a joint written motion requesting that the court of origin
conduct the JDR proceedings and trial.
3. Family Courts – Unless otherwise agreed upon as
provided below, the JDR proceedings in areas where only
one court is designated as a family court, shall be
conducted by a judge of another branch through raffle.
However, if there is another family court in the same area,
the family court to whom the case was originally raffled
shall conduct JDR proceedings and if no settlement is
reached, the other family court shall conduct the pre-trial
proper and trial.
17
Includes post-judgment proceedings, e.g. motion for reconsideration, execution, etc.
18
Notwithstanding the foregoing, before commencement
of the JDR proceedings, the parties may file a joint written
motion requesting that the family court to which the case
was originally raffled shall conduct the JDR proceedings
and trial.
Despite the non-mediatable nature of the principal
case, like annulment of marriage, other issues such as
custody of children, support, visitation, property relations
and guardianship, may be referred to CAM and JDR to
limit the issues for trial.
4. Commercial, Intellectual Property, and
Environmental Courts - Unless otherwise agreed upon as
provided below, the JDR proceedings in areas where only
one court is designated as commercial/intellectual
property/environmental court, hereafter referred to as
special court, shall be conducted by another judge through
raffle and not by the judge of the special court. Where
settlement is not reached, the judge of the special court
shall be the trial judge. Any incident or motion filed before
the pre-trial stage shall be dealt with by the special court
that shall refer the case to CAM.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, before commencement
of the JDR proceedings, the parties may file a joint written
motion requesting that the special courts to which the case
was originally raffled shall conduct the JDR proceedings
and trial.
19
is granted, the trial shall be suspended18 and the case
referred to JDR, which shall be conducted by another judge
through raffle in multiple sala courts.
If settlement is reached during JDR, the JDR court
shall take appropriate action thereon, i.e.
approval/disapproval of the compromise agreement. If
settlement is not reached at JDR, the case shall be
returned to the referring court for continuation of trial.
In single sala courts, the JDR shall be conducted by
the nearest court (or pair court, if any) regardless of the
level of the latter court. The result of the JDR proceedings
shall be referred to the court of origin for appropriate
action, e.g. approval of the compromise agreement, trial,
etc.
The parties may, by joint written motion, despite
confidential information that may be divulged during JDR
proceedings, file a request that their case be not transferred
to other courts for JDR and that they agree to have the trial
judge continue the trial should the case not be settled
through JDR.
V. Settlement Period
Any Settlement Period declared by the Supreme Court
is understood to include JDR and, therefore, half of all
cases referred to mediation shall be for JDR settlement.
The procedure shall be as stated in Roman Numeral IV
above, except that no written motion is required from the
parties for their case to be referred to JDR.
18
Paragraph 1, Article 2030 of the Civil Code.
20
VI. Party Participation
VIII. Sanctions
22
In criminal cases covered by CAM and JDR, where
settlement on the civil aspect has been reached but the period
of payment in accordance with the terms of settlement
exceeds one (1) year, the case may be archived upon motion of
the prosecution, with notice to the private complainant and
approval by the judge.
X. Suspension of periods
XI. Settlement
A. CIVIL CASES:
B. CRIMINAL CASES:
24
XII. Pre-trial Proper
The trial judge to whom the case was turned over, shall
expeditiously proceed to trial, after the pre-trial and, thereafter,
render judgment in accordance with the established facts,
evidence, and the applicable laws.
25
PART FOUR
I. Confidentiality
19
Guidelines for Parties’ Counsel in Court-Annexed Mediation Cases, A.M. No. 04-3-15 SC PHILJA, 15
March 2004 .
26
In particular, they shall perform the following functions:
28
(2) Complaint/Information for offenses with
maximum imposable penalty of prision
correccional in its maximum period or six
years imprisonment, except where the civil
liability is reserved or is subject of a
separate action;
29
Court of Tax Appeals shall also collect the amount of ONE
THOUSAND PESOS (P1,000.00) for the appeal from the
decision of a CTA Division to the CTA En Banc.
30
III. Utilization and Disbursement
(A.M. No. 05-3-25-SC-PHILJA dated 26 April 2005)
31
for mediation services rendered or to be rendered. It is
intended as a contribution to promote mediation. The
mediator’s fee is the authorized amount paid from the
mediation fund for services rendered by a mediator.
32
PART SIX
21
Court En Banc Resolution, dated June 3, 3008, under A.M. No. 08-2-5-SC-PHILJA.
33
PHILJA Chancellor – Chairperson
Four (4) regular members, namely:
1. Dean Eduardo D. De los Angeles
2. Dean Pacifico A. Agabin
3. Judge Divina Luz P. Aquino-Simbulan
4. Atty. Linda L. Malenab-Hornilla
d) CENTRAL OFFICE
a. Mediation Planning and Research Division
b. Mediation Resource Management Division
c. Mediation Education, Training and Monitoring
Division
22
Justice Justo P. Torres, Jr., PHILJA Chancellor, changed to Justice Marina L. Buzon, Executive Secretary,
per Board Resolution No. 08-18, dated May 15, 2008 of the PHILJA Board of Trustees.
34
*Mediation Aide
*Accredited Mediation
c. Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR)
*Mediation Staff Officer V
*Mediation Staff Assistant II
*Mediation Aide
d. Mobile Court Annexed-Mediation (MCAM)
Every bus of the Justice on Wheels (JOW)
deployed for mediation in selected areas is
considered as a PMC Unit, thus, it is entitled to the
following:
*Mediation Staff Officer V
*Mediation Staff Assistant II
*Mediation Aide
*accredited Mediators
35
e. Monitor and evaluate the performance of Mediators,
such as in settling disputes and in observing the Code
of Ethical Standards for Mediators, upgrade their
mediation skills, and oversee their further
development. Such evaluation shall be the basis for
the renewal of their accreditation as Mediators;
f. Provide a grievance mechanism and procedure for
addressing complaints against Mediators and PMC
Unit Staff;
g. Promote and sustain the programs and activities of
Court-annexed Mediation (CAM), Appellate Court
Mediation (ACM), Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR),
Mobile Court-Annexed Mediation (MCAM), and
eventually Court-Annexed Arbitration (CAA) and other
Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms;
h. Call on any government agency, office,
instrumentality, commission or council to render such
assistance as may be necessary for the efficient
performance of its functions; and
i. Exercise such other functions necessary in
furtherance of its mandate.
_________________ __________________________
ALFREDO F. TADIAR EDUARDO D. DE LOS ANGELES
Member Member
______________________ _____________________
RAUL B. VILLANUEVA PACIFICO A. AGABIN
Member Member
_______________________________ ___________________
LINDA L. MALENAB-HORNILLA MARINA L. BUZON
Member Member
____________________
ADOLFO S. AZCUNA
Chairperson
36