1. https://www.studocu.

com/ph/document/urdaneta-city-university/criminology/
final-copy-of-chapter-1-4/34315149

According to Urdaneta University 2019, the common cases elevated in Barangay Sta.
Rosa, Sta. Maria, Pangasinan, were oral defamation, physical injury, theft, VAWC,
threats, illegal firearm, child abuse and collection of debts.

Also, It is noticed the overlapping hearing sessions and for there was no designated
room for Lupon Hearings. Residents in Barangay have more free time and lack of
financial support during a pandemic that caused simultaneous hearings. In
addition, there is lack of orientation among the complainant and local
residents in filing complaints and the process of the program that caused several
pending cases. In attending hearing cases, the Lupon Tagapamayapa were absent
during their seminars and hearing sessions.

2. https://legalresearchph.com/2021/02/02/the-implementation-of-the-barangay-
justice-system-as-a-community-based-dispute-settlement-mechanism-in-barangay-
mansilingan-in-bacolod-city-a-policy-review/

The Katarungang Pambarangay, or the Barangay Justice System is a local justice

system in the Philippines. It is operated by the smallest of the local government
units, the barangay, and is overseen by the barangay captain, the highest elected
official of the barangay and its executive. The barangay captain sits on the Lupon
Tagapamayapa along with other barangay residents, which is the committee that
decides disputes and other matters. They do not constitute a court as they do not
have judicial powers. The system exists to help decongest the regular courts and
works mostly as “alternative, community-based mechanism for dispute resolution of
conflicts,” also described as a “compulsory mediation process at the village level.
(Metro, Billones, and Pao 2021)

3. https://garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Feb2018/12.pdf

The Lupon Tagapamayapa performs its mandate in accordance to existing legal

protocols of the law particularly the requirements of institutionalized conciliation
processes. It is a very imperative focus of the Lupon that disputes are amicably
settle as it away by which it saves both parties from court of law litigation that is
more time consuming and relatively expensive. The Lupon members are confident
to discharge their exceptional efforts manifested by being conscious and discipline
enough over their mandated roles, functions and responsibilities to make every
conciliation proceedings successful through the observance of all the considered
aspect of effectiveness. The Lupon is readily available and accommodating in
 providing greater performing its responsibility in accordance with the existing
provisions of the law ensuring that disputes must be compulsory and obligatory
upon the parties subject to the conciliation process. Moreover, Lupon
Tagapamayapa is effective to a great extent in acting judiciously in their duty to
amicably settle disputes. It is a policy of it to follow the legal protocols with utmost
diligence as stipulated for under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law, Local
Government Code of 1991, and other similar statutes. Lastly, the Lupon members
are carefully executing the step-by-step process in accordance with their lawful
mandate; exercises a deeper evaluation and investigation of the cases brought
before them in order to qualify with their compulsory function to harmoniously
settle conflicts. (ISSN Vol 2. 2018).

4. http://apjeas.apjmr.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/APJEAS-2020.7.3.03.pdf

The Lupong tagapamayapa in the Municipality of Balayan with regards to

composition, functions and procedures is highly complied with. Scheduling of both
parties is the problem encountered in the implementation of Lupong tagapamayapa.
There is a significant difference in the implementation of Lupong tagapamayapa
when respondents were grouped according to category. Difference of responses on
the level of implementation when grouped according to barangay is not significant.
On the other hand, there is a significant difference in the problems encountered
when grouped according to Barangay and category (Artada and Tamayo 2020)
 5. IMPLEMENTATION OF BARANGAY JUSTICE SYSTEM AND COMMUNITY
SATISFACTION IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF CALAUAN, LAGUNA: BASIS FOR
INTERVENTION PROGRAM (Gonzales 2022)
file:///C:/Users/JAJA/Desktop/1001031620223497.pdf
The Barangay Justice is fully implementing their directives and their mandated duties like
maintaining records of cases, minutes of hearings or meetings, records of cases,
agreements to another agency or higher courts, and applying settlement techniques or
strategies to expedite the mediation process within the concept of the Barangay Justice
System. That there is no significant difference in the assessments of the respondents on the
level of Implementation of the Barangay Justice System. Thus, the null hypo is accepted.
That the community recognizes the services provided by the Lupon Tagapamayapa
Members in mediating cases, providing medical assistance and case reports as well as
giving opportunities to clients to present themselves and their pieces of pieces of evidence
toward the resolution of the case. That there is no significant difference in the Satisfaction
of clients and Referral of Cases, thus null hypothesis is accepted relative to the two
variables. While, there is a significant difference in the assessment of the Barangay Lupon
Tagapamayapa Members and its Constituents as regards the Settlement of Filed Cases, thus
null hypothesis is rejected. The test is also classified as partially upheld. That it can be
concluded that there is a significant relationship between the level of implementation and
the level of community satisfaction in the Barangay Justice System in the municipality of
Calauan, Laguna. That the results from regression analysis can be concluded that they may
have an impact on the Level of Implementation of the Barangay Justice System and there is
no significant difference in the variables namely Settlement of Filed Cases, Satisfaction of
Clients Involved, and Referral of Cases.

6. https://galingpook.org/what-we-do/awards/awardees/strengthening-the-justice-
system-in-the-grassroots/

Judiciary statistics reveal that the government is able to save PhP10,000.00 for
every case settled at the barangay level. The competence of the Lupons in settling
disputes through conciliation resulted in the decreasing number of cases filed in
court dockets. Between 2004 to 2006, the Lupons managed to resolve six out of 10
cases that they handled. In 2004, out of the 11,895 cases filed, 7,286 were resolved.
In 2005, the Lupons successfully mediated 7,220 cases out of the 11,568 filed. And
in 2006, out of the 13,600 cases filed, 8,541 were settled by the Lupons. Lupon
members are now recognized as persons in authority and have gained the people’s
trust and respect because of their professionalism, intelligence and impartiality in
settling disputes. Litigants no longer hesitate to submit themselves to the Lupons
and accept the advice or decision handed down by the Lupon members. (Galingpook
2013)
7.

Disputes are best resolved as close as possible to their source. Indonesian villages
have been managing internal conflict utilizing mediation and conciliation for
hundreds of years. Social transformation in the past 40 years has challenged the
ongoing suitability of traditional approaches. Power needs to be transferred from
the village elites in order to more effectively recognize the diverse ethnic and
religious character of modern Indonesia. Reforms need not undermine the core of
customary dispute resolution but, rather, develop a synthesis between modern and
traditional approaches. The Barangay Justice System is an imperfect but generally
successful model from which Indonesia can learn. The economic, social, political and
legal similarities between the two countries suggest that Philippine experience is
valuable for comparative purposes.
8. According to the study conducted by Agustin et al., 2018 entitled the effectiveness of
concillation process: a practical way of delivering justice, it was found out that the
out that the Lupon members are confident to discharge their exceptional efforts manifested
by being conscious and discipline enough over their mandated roles, functions and
responsibilities to make every conciliation proceedings successful through the observance
of all the considered aspect of effectiveness. Moreover, the Lupon is readily available and
accommodating in providing greater performing its responsibility in accordance with the
existing provisions of the law ensuring that disputes must be compulsory and obligatory
upon the parties subject to the conciliation process; that Lupon Tagapamayapa is effective
to a great extent in acting judiciously in their duty to amicably settle disputes; policy of it to
follow the legal protocols with utmost diligence as stipulated for under the Katarungang
Pambarangay Law, Local Government Code of 1991, and other similar statutes. Lastly, the
Lupon members are carefully executing the step-by-step process in accordance with their
lawful mandate; exercises a deeper evaluation and investigation of the cases brought before
them in order to qualify with their compulsory function to harmoniously settle conflicts. In
the view of the findings of this undertaking, he researchers recommended that the Lupon
Tagapamayapa be more effective in its current and future conciliation efforts over
celebrated cases, it must come up with pro-active advocacies and milestone effort in
identifying issues, projects, programs, activities, actions, concerns and problematic
situations. Furthermore, they must exercise their legal mandate without prejudice to the
speedy disposition of cases and proper administration of justice.
https://garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Feb2018/12.pdf?
fbclid=IwAR1BrObTZEhUU_vrBCfE8WkEOAMMDUiawJveZh8jugFwFzmgGueadizx7
Sw
9. Conciliation/Mediation

The Local Government Code provides for the procedure of reconciliation in the
KatarungangPambarangay. It states:
Section 410. Procedure for Amicable Settlement. -
(a) Who may initiate proceeding - Upon payment of the appropriate filing fee, any
individual who has a cause of action against another individual involving any matter
 within the authority of the lupon may complain, orally or in writing, to the lupon
chairman of the barangay.
(b) Mediation by lupon chairman - Upon receipt of the complaint, the lupon chairman
shall within the next working day summon the respondent(s), with notice to the
complainant(s) for them and their witnesses to appear before him for a mediation of
their conflicting interests. If he fails in his mediation effort within fifteen (15) days from
the first meeting of the parties before him, he shall forthwith set a date for the
constitution of the pangkat in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter.
(c) Suspension of prescriptive period of offenses - While the dispute is under mediation,
conciliation, or arbitration, the prescriptive periods for offenses and cause of action
under existing laws shall be interrupted upon filing the complaint with the punong
barangay. The prescriptive periods shall resume upon receipt by the complainant of the
complainant or the certificate of repudiation or of the certification to file action issued
by the lupon or pangkat secretary: Provided, however, that such interruption shall not
exceed sixty (60) days from the filing of the complaint with the punong barangay.
(d) Issuance of summons; hearing; grounds for disqualification - The pangkat shall
convene not later than three (3) days from its constitution, on the day and hour set by
the lupon chairman, to hear both parties and their witnesses, simplify issues, and
explore all possibilities for amicable settlement. For this purpose, the pangkat may
issue summons for the personal appearance of parties and witnesses before it. In the
event that a party moves to disqualify any member of the pangkat by reason of
relationship, bias, interest, or any other similar grounds discovered after the
constitution of the pangkat, the matter shall be resolved by the affirmative vote of the
majority of the pangkat whose decision shall be final. Should disqualification be decided
upon, the resulting vacancy shall be filled as herein provided for.
(e) Period to arrive at a settlement - The pangkat shall arrive at a settlement or
resolution of the dispute within fifteen (15) days from the day it convenes in
accordance with this section. This period shall, at the discretion of the pangkat, be
extendible for another period which shall not exceed fifteen (15) days, except in clearly
meritorious cases"
Section 415 of the Local Government Code provides that in all Katarungang
Pambarangay proceedings, the parties must appear in person without the assistance of
counsel or representative, except for minors and incompetents who may be assisted by
their next-of-kin who are not lawyers. It is expressly prohibited the appearance of a
lawyer for a complainant or respondent. A lawyer however may appear in Katarungang
Pambarangay if he is one of the parties in the dispute.
The conduct of hearing is informal but orderly. Rule VI, Sec.5 of the Implementing Rules
of the Katarunagng Pambarangay states:
"The Punong Barangay and the Pangkat shall proceed to hear the matter in dispute in
an informal but orderly manner, without regard to technical rules of evidence, and as is
best calculated to effect a fair settlement of the dispute and bring about a harmonious
relationship of the parties.
Proceedings before the Punong Barangay shall be recorded by the Lupon Secretary
while those before the Pangkat shall be recorded by the Pangkat Secretary. The record
shall note the date and time of hearing, appearance of parties, names of witnesses and
substance of their testimonies, objections and resolutions, and such other matters as
will be helpful to a full understanding of the case."

Compliance to procedures
The administration of justice is consist of substantive and procedural law.
In order to give meaning to the substance of the law, proper procedures must be
followed by the one administering it.
The Local Government Code of 1991 provides for the procedures in
Settling disputes in Katarungang Pambarangay:
“Section 410. Procedure for Amicable Settlement. -
(a) Who may initiate proceeding Upon payment of the appropriate filing fee, any
individual who has a cause of action against another individual involving any matter
within the authority of the lupon may complain, orally or in writing, to the lupon
chairman of the barangay.
(b) Mediation by lupon chairman - Upon receipt of the complaint, the lupon chairman
shall within the next working day summon the respondent(s), with notice to the
complainant(s) for them and their witnesses to appear before him for a mediation of
their conflicting interests. If he fails in his mediation effort within fifteen (15) days from
the first meeting of the parties before him, he shall forthwith set a date for the
constitution of the pangkat in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter.
(c) Suspension of prescriptive period of offenses - While the dispute is under mediation,
conciliation, or arbitration, the prescriptive periods for offenses and cause of action
under existing laws shall be interrupted upon filing the complaint with the punong
barangay. The prescriptive periods shall resume upon receipt by the complainant of the
complainant or the certificate of repudiation or of the certification to file action issued
by the lupon or pangkat secretary: Provided, however, That such interruption shall not
exceed sixty (60) days from the filing of the complaint with the punong barangay.
(d) Issuance of summons; hearing; grounds for disqualification - The pangkat shall
convene not later than three (3) days from its constitution, on the day and hour set by
the lupon chairman, to hear both parties and their witnesses, simplify issues, and
explore all possibilities for amicable settlement. For this purpose, the pangkat may
issue summons for the personal appearance of parties and witnesses before it. In the
event that a party moves to disqualify any member of the pangkat by reason of
relationship, bias, interest, or any other similar grounds discovered after the
constitution of the pangkat, the matter shall be resolved by the affirmative vote of the
majority of the pangkat whose decision shall be final. Should disqualification be decided
upon, the resulting vacancy shall be filled as herein provided for.
(e) Period to arrive at a settlement - The pangkat shall arrive at a settlement or
resolution of the dispute within fifteen (15) days from the day it convenes in
accordance with this section. This period shall, at the discretion of the pangkat, be
extendible for another period which shall not exceed fifteen (15) days, except in clearly
meritorious cases."

Effective Settlement of Disputes

Effective settlement of disputes is one of the main reasons why residents bring their
disputes in the Katarungang Pambarangay where it can be given immediate action and
result. The amicable settlement and arbitration awards in the Katarungang
Pambarangay has the following effect:
"Effect of Amicable Settlement and Arbitration Award. - The amicable settlement and
arbitration award shall have the force and effect of a final judgment of a court upon the
expiration of ten (10) days from the date thereof, unless repudiation of the settlement
has been made or a petition to nullify the award has been filed before the proper city or
municipal court."(Section - Local Government Code of 1991)"

The katarungang Pambarangay Law

As compared to Presidential Decree No. 1508, or the earlier version of the
Katarungang Pambarangay Law, Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law under the
Local Government code of 1991 has three distincts features, to wit:
1. The lupon’s authority in criminal offenses were amplified, from those punishable by
imprisonment not more than thirty (30) days or a fine not higher than P 200.00 P.D
1508, to those offenses punishable by imprisonment not exceeding (1) year or a fine
not exceeding P5,000.
2. As to the venue, the code provides that disputes arising at the workplace where the
contending parties are registered for study, shall be brought to the respective
barangay where the aforementioned institutions or workplace is situated.
3. The suspension of the prescriptive periods during the pendency of the mediation or
arbitration process have also been provided in the Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law. Paragraph C of Section 410 of the law, however, suffers from
ambiguity when it provides that the prescriptive periods “shall resume lupon
receipt by the complainant of the complaint or the certificates of repudiation or of
the certification to file action issued by the lupon, or the pangkat secretary.”
(PS. https://www.scribd.com/embeds/321885015/content?
start_page=1&view_mode=scroll&access_key=key-fFexxf7r1bzEfWu3HKwf )
BASAHIN MO NGA TO, D KO ALAM KUNG PASOK SIYA SA DATE KASI BELOW 2010
PERO JURISPUDENCE MGA GAMIT.

Under the Philippine perspective, Soriano (2013) cited that there were laws promulgated
by chieftains and council elders in the Philippines no matter how primitive. Customary laws
were handed down orally from generation to generation and constituted the bulk of laws of
the barangay. Written laws were those promulgated by the chieftain and his elders time to
time. Only a few of the written laws have come down to the present because the elements
have destroyed many. Disputes are inevitable in any society, and the Filipino society before
the arrival of the Spaniards was not an exception. Disputes were usually decided peacefully
through a court composed of the chieftain as judge and the barangay elders as the jury.
Conflicts arising between subjects of different barangay were resolved through arbitration
by a board composed of elders from a neutral barangay. Soriano, O. (2013). The Philippine
criminal justice system: theories, models & practices. Quezon City: Great Books Publishing

According to Okeke 2021, despite advancements in modern criminal justice administration

and its widespread use in criminal justice administration in other parts of the globe, alternative
dispute resolution (ADR) was not widely used in Nigeria. The findings suggest that ADR may
result in a significant reduction in the time and cost of the dispensation of justice that addressed
injustice in the system of criminal justice administration, leading to positive social change. It
would strengthen social stability and ensure satisfaction for the victim, offender, community,
and society at large. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?
article=11798&context=dissertations

In a society where the majority of the population are poor, with widespread illiteracy, lack of
access to justice, and high cost and scarcity of lawyers, ADR was the best method of conflict
resolution (Gowok, 2017). Gowok, S. M. (2017). Alternative dispute resolution in Ethiopia – A
legal framework https://www.ajol.info

The delay in disposal of criminal cases, which included petty crimes like burglary, caused great
damage to the justice delivery system. The most common forms of ADR were arbitration,
mediation, negotiation and conciliation (Davletov & Bratchikov, 2014) Davletov, A. A., &
Bratchikov, D. A. (2014). The issue of the application of mediation in the criminal trial in Russia.
Russian Juridical Journal, 97(5), 168-179
Fainisi (2017) posited that mediation in criminal cases as an alternative means to settle disputes
should apply to a large category of crimes. Folarin (2017) argued that mediating criminal
disputes led to making more efficient and better managed criminal proceedings and allowed the
justice to focus attention toward complex and higher difficult cases. Fainisi, F. (2017). Mediation
in the field of criminal disputes at European level. Contemporary Readings in Law & Social
Justice, 9(2), 293-309.

Promoting amicable settlement at the local level is an alternative mechanism adopted to

expedite the resolution of cases filed by disputing parties at the local level. This is also used an
option to reduce the thousands of cases filed in the Philippine regular courts which are
unattended and seemed to be dormant. The lack of court judges and inability of the disputing
parties to pay the lucrative lawyers’ fees are the common reasons used to explain the slow pace
of justice in the Philippine justice system (Sam and Abubakar-Sam, 2014).
https://www.aijssnet.com/journals/Vol_3_No_3_May_2014/9.pdfhttps://www.aijssnet.com/
journals/Vol_3_No_3_May_2014/9.pdf

The Barangay Justice System or Katarungang Pambarangay is the preferred ADR among Filipinos.
It is a preferred option for mediation among Filipinos in a barangay level. The Katarungang
Pambarangay is a method for the amicable settlement of disputes at the barangay level. The
main purpose of this method is to promote fast and effective administration of disputes and to
decongest the local courts of conciliable criminal and civil cases. Philippine local courts are
severely crowded (Mohammed & Caingat, 2017). Mohammed, Murphy P. and Caingat, Nicanor
C. 2017. Barangay Justice System in Barangay Matatalaib, Tarlac City: An Evaluation. Working
papers 2017-03-21, Voice of Research. Accessed from
https://ideas.repec.org/p/vor/issues/2017-03-21.html. Accessed in November 29, 2019.

The Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) are mechanisms of solving disputes or/and conflicts
between parties without recourse to the courts. The methods used in the ADR processes include
mediation, negotiation and wherever possible reconciliation. Through ADR, the conflicting
parties are brought together to dialogue and agree on a voluntary basis in order to forge a way
forward. The focus of ADR mechanisms is for now primarily on civil cases (Sheria, 2017). ] Sheria,
Kitui Cha. 2017. Alternative Justice Systems (AJS) Piloting in Endebess. Retrieved from
http://kituochasheria.or.ke/alternative-justice-systems-endebess/

The objectives of Katarungang Pambarangay (Barangay Justice System) can be traced back to
the original law that created it. On the research conducted by Mohammed and Caingat (2017)
have enumerated four objectives of the Katarungang Pambarangay (Barangay Justice System).
These are: the promotion of speedy administration of justice; minimization of indiscriminate
filing of cases in courts; minimization of congestion of court dockets to enhance the quality of
justice dispensed by the courts; and, the perpetuation and recognition of time- honored
tradition of amicably settling disputes at the community level. This legislation paved the way for
the creation of the Barangay Justice System or Katarungang Pambarangay (Barangay Justice
System) in the Philippines. Mohammed, Murphy P. and Caingat, Nicanor C. 2017. Barangay
Justice System in Barangay Matatalaib, Tarlac City: An Evaluation. Working papers 2017-03-21,
Voice of Research. Accessed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/vor/issues/2017-03-21.html.
Accessed in November 29, 2019.

The Punong Barangay as the duly elected leader of the barangay, is the primary implementor of
the Katarungan Pambarangay (Barangay Justice System). In his role as an acknowledged leader
of the community, the Punong Barangay is expected to represent all the people in performing
the administrative duties as outlined under the Katarungan Pambarangay (Barangay Justice
System) Law (RA 7160).

According to the study conducted by Guia and Mangubat 2021 Katarungan Pambarangay
(Barangay Justice System) is composed of the three (3) components, namely: Lupong
Tagapamayapa (Peace-making Council), Pangkat ng Tagapagsundo (Conciliation Panel), and
Legal Advisers. Of the 72 cases filed on the span of this study, 68 cases were settled amicable by
the warring parties. The members of the Katarungan Pambarangay (Barangay Justice System)
encountered these following problems: the lack training in the technical know, lack of
supervision system, and lack of cooperation from either party. Overall, the Katarungan
Pambarangay or the Barangay Justice System is beneficial to the community for it preserves of
relationship among neighbors, it gives faster resolution to the problems, it is economically
beneficial, and it offers practical agreements between warring parties.
https://www.ijase.org/index.php/ijase/article/download/5/12/27