This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
The Barangay Justice System was institutionalized by then President Ferdinand Marcos with the passage of Presidential Decree No. 1508, otherwise known as the Katarungang Pambarangay Law. PRESIDENTIAL DECREE No. 1508 June 11, 1978 repealed by R.A. 7160 : ESTABLISHING A SYSTEM OF AMICABLY SETTLING DISPUTES AT THE BARANGAY LEVEL Republic Act 7160, otherwise known as the 1991 Local Government Code, gives barangays the mandate to enforce peace and order and provide support for the effective enforcement of human rights and justice. The provisions of PD 1508 refer now to Sections 399 to 422, Chapter 7 of RA 7160. The Katarungang Pambarangay or Barangay Justice System is a community-based dispute settlement mechanism that is administered by the basic political unit of the country, the barangay.
The law had the following objectives: 1.To promote the speedy administration of justice 2.To minimize the indiscriminate filing of cases in courts 3.To minimize the congestion of court dockets and thereby enhance the quality of justice dispensed by the courts 4. To perpetuate and recognize the time-honored tradition of amicably settling disputes at the community level. Under the Barangay Justice System • Main strategy -to provide a venue for the disputing parties to search for a solution that is mutually acceptable. Primary role -to decide disputes and impose a solution on the parties but to assist the parties in discussing the possible amicable settlement of their disputes.
Barangay Justice System Punong Barangay and the community conciliators (Lupon members) do not act as judges or adjudicators of disputes but as facilitators for the disputing parties’ discussion of possible solutions. The personal appearance and participation of the disputing parties is necessary while the non-appearance of the parties will have corresponding sanctions. It provides an alternative mode for dispute resolution to the costly and lengthy process of settling disputes in regular courts. The parties do not need to secure the services of lawyers. The strength of the Barangay Justice System lies in the fact that it is based in the community itself, and is administered by community members using traditional practices in dispute resolution. The Supreme Court issued Administrative Circular No. 14-93 on July 15, 1993 directing the courts to ensure compliance with the requirement of prior recourse to the Barangay Justice as a condition for filing a complaint in court for cases that are covered by the system.
IS IT ONLY THE PUNONG BARANGAY WHO HAS THE AUTHORITY TO CONSTITUTE THE LUPON? -YES, ONLY THE PUNONG BARANGAY CAN APPOINT THE LUPON MEMBERS. IT IS HIS/HER EXCLUSIVE PREROGATIVE — NO NEED FOR APPROVAL, CONFIRMATION OR RATIFICATION OF THE SANGGUNIANG BARANGAY. HOW MANY PEOPLE SHOULD INCLUDE IN THE LIST? A MINIMUM OF TEN AND A MAXIMUM OF TWENTY PERSONS (Sec. 399 (a)) WHEN AND HOW THE LUPON CONSTITUTE? -WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) DAYS FROM THE START OF THE TERM OF THE PUNONG BARANGAY, THE LATTER SHOULD ISSUE A NOTICE TO CONSTITUTE THE LUPON AND PREPARE THE LIST OF THE NAMES OF PROPOSED LUPON MEMBERS. (Sec. 399 (c)) QUALIFIED AS LUPON MEMBERS (Sec. 399 (b)) } ACTUAL RESIDENTS/ WORKING IN THE BARANGAY } OF LEGAL AGE WITH THE FOLLOWING QUALITIES: 1. INTEGRITY, 2. IMPARTIALITY, 3. INDEPENDENCE, 4. FAIRNESS, 5. REPUTATION FOR PROBITY, 6. PATIENCE, 7. RESOURCEFULNESS, 8. OPEN-MINDEDNESS 9. FLEXIBILITY DISQUALIFIED TO BE LUPON MEMBERS BELOW 18 YRS OF AGE INCOMPETENT CONVICTED OF A CRIME CARRYING WITH IT PENALTIES OF PERPETUAL OR TEMPORARY DISQUALIFICATION FROM HOLDING PUBLIC OFFICE ELECTED GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL MEMBER OF ARMED FORCES WHO IS IN THE ACTIVE SERVIC
SIX STEPS TO CONSTITUTE THE LUPON STEP 1: Determining the actual number of Lupon Members (Sec. 399(a) ) STEP 2: Preparing a notice to constitute the Lupon M (Sec. 399(c) ) KP FORM # 1: NOTICE TO CONSTITUTE THE LUPON STEP 3: Posting the notice to constitute the Lupon (Sec. 399(e) ) STEP 4: Appointment of Lupon Members (Sec. 399(e) ) KP FORM # 2: APPOINTMENT LETTER STEP 5: Oath taking of Lupon members (Sec. 400) KP FORM # 5: LUPON MEMBER OATH STATEMENT STEP 6: Posting
GROUP 3&4 2
LUPONG TAGAPAMAYAPA TERM OF OFFICE •SERVE FOR THREE (3) YEARS UNLESS TERMINATED BY DEATH, RESIGNATION, TRANSFER OF RESIDENCE OR PLACE OF WORK, OR WITHDRAWAL OF APPOINTMENT BY THE PUNONG BARANGAY
VACANCIES (SEC. 401)
•SHOULD BE CONCURRED WITH A MAJORITY OF ALL THE MEMBERS OF LUPON. (SEE KP FORM 6)
COMPENSATION OR BENEFITS (SEC. 406 (B))
•MEMBERS SHALL SERVE WITHOUT ANY COMPENSATION. •UNDER COMMISSION ON HIGHER EDUCATION (CHED) ORDER 62 SERIES OF 1997, TWO DAUGHTERS OR SONS OF A LUPON MEMBER ARE QUALIFIED TO BECOME A STATE SCHOLAR IN TERTIARY EDUCATION TO ANY STATE COLLEGES OR UNIVERSITIES
MEDIATION THROUGH THE PUNONG BARANGAY AS PUNONG BARANGAY, he/she HAVE AN AUTHORITY OR POWER TO MEDIATE CASES OF THE RESIDENTS IN THE BARANGAY. (Sec. 410 (b)) WHAT IF ONLY ONE OF THE INVOLVED PARTIES ARE FROM THE BARANGAY? -THE DISPUTE WILL BE SETTLED IN THE BARANGAY WHERE THE RESPONDENTS OR ONE OF THE RESPONDENTS RESIDE AT THE CHOICE OF THE COMPLAINANT. (Sec. 409 (b)) IF ANY OF THE INVOLVED PARTIES IS INCOMPETENT OR A MINOR? HE/SHE SHOULD BE REPRESENTED BY A LEGAL GUARDIAN OR NEXT OF KIN WHO IS NOT A LAWYER (SEC. 415). What are the cases under the Katarungang Pambarangay? ALL DISPUTES, CIVIL AND CRIMINAL IN NATURE WHERE PARTIES ACTUALLY RESIDE IN THE SAME CITY OR MUNICIPALITY ARE SUBJECTED TO PROCEEDINGS OF AMICABLE SETTLEMENT. (Sec. 408) CASES UNDER KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY 1. ALARMS AND SCANDALS (ART. 155); 2. USING FALSE CERTIFICATES (ART. 175); 3. USING FICTITIOUS NAMES AND CONCEALING TRUE NAMES (ART. 178); 4.SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURIES AND MALTREATMENT (ART. 266); 5. UNLAWFUL ARREST (ART. 269); 6. INDUCING A MINOR TO ABANDON HIS/HER HOME (ART. 271); 7.QUALIFIED TRESSPASS TO DWELLING (WITHOUT THE USE OF VIOLENCE AND INTIMIDATION). (ART. 280);
GROUP 3&4 3
8.LIGHT THREATS (ART. 283); 9.GRAVE COERCION (ART. 286);
Other Cases Exempt from the Katarungang Pambarangay Under paragraph 3 of Administrative Circular No. 14-93, all disputes are subject to Barangay conciliation pursuant to the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law [formerly P. D. 1508, repealed and now replaced by Secs. 399-422, Chapter VII, Title I, Book III, and Sec. 515, Title I, Book IV, R.A. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991], and prior recourse thereto is a pre-condition before filing a complaint in court or any government offices, except in the following disputes:  Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or instrumentality thereof;  Where one party is a public officer or employee and the dispute relates to the performance of his official functions;  Where the dispute involves real properties located in different cities and municipalities, unless the parties thereto agree to submit their difference to amicable settlement by an appropriate Lupon;  Any complaint by or against corporations, partnerships or juridical entities, since only individuals shall be parties to Barangay conciliation proceedings either as complainants or respondents [Sec. 1, Rule VI, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules];  Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or municipalities, except where such barangay units adjoin each other and the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate Lupon;  Offenses for which the law prescribes a maximum penalty of imprisonment exceeding one  year or a fine of over five thousand pesos (P5,000.00);  Offenses where there is no private offended party;  Disputes where urgent legal action is necessary to prevent injustice from being committed or further continued, specifically the following: [a] Criminal cases where accused is under police custody or detention [See Sec. 412 (b) (1), Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law]; [b] Petitions for habeas corpus by a person illegally deprived of his rightful custody over another or a person illegally deprived of or on acting in his behalf; [c] Actions coupled with provisional remedies such as preliminary injunction, attachment, delivery of personal property and support during the pendency of the action; and [d] Actions which may be barred by the Statute of Limitations.  Any class of disputes which the President may determine in the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice;
GROUP 3&4 4
 Where the dispute arises from the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) [Secs. 46 & 47, R. A. 6657];  Labor disputes or controversies arising from employer-employee relations [Montoya vs. Escayo, et al., 171 SCRA 442; Art. 226, Labor Code, as amended, which grants original and exclusive jurisdiction over conciliation and mediation of disputes, grievances or problems to certain offices of the Department of Labor and Employment];  Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise which may be filed directly in court [See Sanchez vs. Tupaz, 158 SCRA 459].  Where the dispute involves members of the same indigenous cultural community, such dispute shall be settled in accordance with the customs and traditions of that particular cultural community, or where one or more of the parties to the aforesaid dispute belong to the minority and the parties mutually agreed to submit their dispute to the indigenous system of amicable settlement [Sec. 412 [c], R.A. 7160] A court in which non-criminal cases not falling within the authority of the Lupon are filed, at any time before trial, may motu proprio refer the case to the Lupon concerned for amicable settlement. [Sec. 408 [g], 2nd par.] STEP IN MEDIATING CASES • THE COMPLAINANT, WITH THE HELP OF THE BARANGAY SECRETARY, WILL FILL UP KP FORM 7. KP FORM # 7: COMPLAINANT’S FORM •A MINIMAL FILING FEE IS BEING CHARGED AND PAID TO THE BARANGAY TREASURER (Sec. 403). AFTER THE COMPLAINANT HAS PAID THE FILING FEE, WHAT IS THE NEXT STEP? • WITHIN THREE (3) DAYS, PUNONG BARANGAY SHOULD ISSUE A NOTICE OF HEARING TO THE COMPLAINANT AND SUMMON THE RESPONDENT BOTH OF WHOM SHOULD APPEAR IN HIS OFFICE (Sec. 410 (d)) KP FORM # 8: NOTICE OF HEARING KP FORM # 9: SUMMON FOR THE RESPONDENT PANGKAT TAGAPAGKASUNDO THERE SHALL BE CONSTITUTED FOR EACH DISPUTE BROUGHT BEFORE THE LUPON A CONCILIATION PANEL TO BE KNOWN AS PANGKAT TAGAPAGKASUNDO CONSISTING OF THREE (3) MEMBERS (SEC. 404 (a)). THE THREE MEMBERS CONSTITUTING THE PANGKAT THEMSELVES THE CHAIRMAN AND THE SECRETARY. SHALL ELECT FROM
The three (3) members constituting the pangkat tagapagkasundo shall elect from among themselves the chairman and the secretary before the two disputing party. The parties will choose among the lupon tagapamayapa who will be the members of the Pangkat Tagapagkasundo. In choosing the pangkat, they will either choose one for each party or agree to each other who will compose the 3 members. The barangay captain may suggest who to choose but the final discretion will come from both parties.
In case both parties will not agree to the composition of the Pangkat Tagapagkasundo, the barangay captain will choose among the lupon tagapagkasundo through draw lots. Conciliation through the pangkat tagapagkasundo THE PUNONG BARANGAY WILL CONSTITUTE THE PANGKAT NG TAGPAGSUNDO WITHIN 15 DAYS FROM THE LAST DAY OF THE MEDIATION PROCEEDINGS (Sec. 410 (e)). HOW DOES CONCILIATION DIFFER FROM MEDIATION? MEDIATION AND CONCILIATION PROCESSES ARE THE SAME EXCEPT MEDIATION IS DONE BY THE PUNONG BARANGAY WHILE THE LATTER IS DONE BY THE PANGKAT HEADED BY A CHAIRPERSON. JUST LIKE MEDIATION, CONCILIATION IS MERELY INTERVENING BETWEEN TWO OR MORE CONTENDING PARTIES IN ORDER TO PREVENT OR PUT AN END TO DISPUTE WITHOUT AN AGREEMENT TO ABIDE BY THE DECISION OF THE CONCILIATOR (Sec. 412 (a)). WHERE PARTIES MAY GO DIRECTLY TO COURT WHERE THE ACCUSED IS UNDER DETENTION; WHERE THE PERSON HAS OTHERWISE BEEN DEPRIVED OF PERSONAL LIBERTY CALLING FOR HABEAS CORPUS PROCEEDINGS; WHERE ACTIONS ARE COUPLED WITH PROVISIONAL REMEDIES; AND WHERE THE ACTION MAY OTHERWISE BE BARRED BY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. (SEC. 412 (b))
FORM OF SETTLEMENT ALL AMICABLE SETTLEMENTS SHALL BE IN WRITING, IN A LANGUAGE OR DIALECT KNOWN TO THE PARTIES, SIGN BY THEM AND ATTESTED BY THE LUPON CHAIRMAN OR THE PANGKAT CHAIRMAN (Sec. 411). KP FORM # 16: AMICABLE SETTLEMENT WHAT IF THE PARTIES FAIL TO AGREE ON THE PANGKAT MEMBERSHIP? THE PUNONG BARANGAY AGAIN AS THE LUPON CHAIRPERSON WILL DETERMINE THE 3 MEMBERS BY DRAWING LOTS TO BE DISTRIBUTED TO THE MEMBERS OF PANGKAT. (Sec. 405) HOW DO WE FILL VACANCY OF PANGKAT? IN CASE OF VACANCY DUE TO OTHER CAUSES, THE PUNONG BARANGAY OR THE LUPON CHAIRPERSON SHALL IN A SIMILAR MANNER, FILLS SUCH VACANCY SHOULD THE PARTY FAIL TO AGREE ON A COMMON CHOICE. THE FAILURE TO APPEAR OF THE COMPLAINANT WITHOUT JUSTIFIABLE REASON, HE/SHE SHALL: 1.DISMISS THE COMPLAINT 2. DIRECT THE ISSUANCE OF AND ATTEST TO THE CERTIFICATION TO BAR THE FILING OF ACTION IN COURT OR ANY GOVERNMENT OFFICES
GROUP 3&4 6
3. APPLY WITH THE LOCAL TRIAL COURT FOR PUNISHMENT OF THE RECALCITRANT PARTY FOR THE INDIRECT CONTEMPT OF COURT. FOR THE RESPONDENT, THE PANGKAT SHALL: 1.DISMISS THE RESPONDENTS COUNTERCLAIM 2. DIRECT THE ISSUANCE OF AND ATTEST TO THE CERTIFICATION TO BAR THE FILING OF RESPONDENT COUNTERCLAIM IN COURT OR GOVERNMENT OFFICE. 3. TO BAR THE FILING GOVERNMENT OFFICE OF RESPONDENT COUNTERCLAIM IN COURT OR
4. TO FILE COMPLAINANT’S ACTION IN COURT OR ANY GOVERNMENT OFFICE AND FILL UP KP FORM 20 HOW CAN THE AMICABLE SETTLEMENT IN THE PANGKAT BE EXECUTED? THE AMICABLE SETTLEMENT HAS THE FORCE AND EFFECT OF A FINAL JUDGMENT OF A COURT UPON THE EXPIRATION OF THE 10-DAY PERIOD OF REPUDIATION AND THIS MAY BE ENFORCED BY EXECUTION BY THE LUPON WITHIN 6 MONTHS FROM THE DATE OF SETTLEMENT. AFTER THE LAPSE OF SUCH TIME, THE SETTLEMENT MAY BE ENFORCED BY FILING A MOTION IN THE MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT OF THE PLACE WHERE THE SETTLEMENT WAS MADE. (Sec. 416) NO SETTLEMENT/ CONCILIATION = A CERTIFICATE TO FILE ACTION SHALL BE FILLED UP WHICH WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE RESPONDING COURT OR GOVERNMENT OFFICE FOR FILLING AN APPROPRIATE CASE. ARBITRATION Ø A PROCESS WHEREIN THE THIRD PARTY FROM OUTSIDE THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IS CHOSEN BY THE PARTIES TO HEAR AND DECIDE THEIR DISPUTE. ARBITRATION AWARD Ø THE DECISION REACHED BY EITHER THE LUPON CHAIRPERSON OR PANGKAT, AS THE CASE MAYBE, UPON PRIOR AGREEMENT IN WRITING BY THE PARTIES TO A DISPUTE FOR THE ADJUDICATORS TO RESOLVE IT. ARBITRATION PROCESS STEP 1. THE ARBITER ORDERS ITS SECRETARY TO CALL THE CASE; STEP 2.. THE SECRETARY IDENTIFIES APPEARANCES FROM BOTH PARTIES; AND ENTER INTO RECORD ALL
STEP 3. THE ARBITER CALLS THE COMPLAINANT TO PRESENT HIS/HER CASE TOGETHER WITH HIS/HER EVIDENCE; NOTE: ANY PERSON WHO IS TO GIVE TESTIMONY BEFORE AN ARBITRATION PROCEEDING SHALL BE SWORN TO AN OATH TO TELL THE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.
STEP 4. WHEN A WITNESS IS NECESSARY, HE/SHE IS SUMMONED TO TESTIFY BEFORE THE PROCEEDING (USING KP FORM 13) STEP 5. THE ARBITER CALLS THE RESPONDENT TO PRESENT HIS/HER DEFENSE; PRESENT EVIDENCES AND WITNESSES; IN THE MANNER AFFORDED TO THE COMPLAINT/S; STEP 6. AFTER THE PARTIES HAVE COMPLETED THEIR PRESENTATION, THE CASE IS CLOSED FOR RESOLUTION/DECISION. (AT THIS STAGE, ADJUDICATIVE TRIAL IS COMPLETED
HOW MUCH TIME IS GIVEN TO HAND DOWN THE DECISION? IT SHALL BE GIVEN FIFTEEN (15) DAYS BUT NOT EARLIER THAN SIX (6) DAYS FROM THE DATE OF THE LAST HEARING, TO EVALUATE AND ISSUE THE ARBITRATION AWARD AND AFTER THAT WITHIN FIVE (5) DAYS. HE SECRETARY SHALL FURNISH A COPY OF THE ARBITRATION AWARD TO PARTIES; KEEP A FILE AT THE LUPON OFFICE AND BE SURE TO FURNISH A COPY TO THE CITY/MUNICIPALITY COURT.
CASES 1. FELICIDAD UY vs. HON. MAXIMO C. CONTRERAS, et al. G.R. No. 111416 ◦the vital role which the revised katarungang pambarangay law plays in the delivery of justice at the barangay level, in promoting peace, stability, and progress therein, and in effectively preventing or reducing expensive and wearisome litigation. Parties to disputes cognizable by the lupon should, with sincerity, exhaust the remedies provided by that law, government prosecutors should exercise due diligence in ascertaining compliance with it, and trial courts should not hesitate to impose the appropriate sanctions for non-compliance thereof. 2. Aquino vs. Aure G.R. No. 153567 Facts: The present case was never referred to the Barangay Lupon for conciliation before Aure and Aure Lending instituted Civil Case No. 17450. Issue: Whether non-recourse to the barangay conciliation process is a jurisdictional flaw that warrants the dismissal of the ejectment suit filed Held: The conciliation process is not a jurisdictional requirement, so that noncompliance therewith cannot affect the jurisdiction which the court has otherwise acquired over the subject matter. 3. Santos vs. Lumibao G.R. No. 169129 Facts: Petitioners prays for the dismissal of the Complaint for lack of cause of action because respondents Spouses Lumbao failed to comply with the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law under Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991, which repealed Presidential Decree No. 1508 requiring first resort to barangay conciliation. Issue: Whether or not the Complaint for Reconveyance with Damages filed by respondents spouses Lumbao is dismissible for their failure to comply with the mandate of the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law under R.A. No. 7160.
GROUP 3&4 8
Held: No, the petitioners can no longer raise the defense of non-compliance with the barangay conciliation proceedings to seek the dismissal of the complaint filed by the respondents Spouses Lumbao, because they already waived the said defense when they failed to file a Motion to Dismiss.