REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES

This chapter reviews related literatures in foreign and local perspectives which

give insight to different types of disputes in community settings, their major causes,

and strategies utilized by mediators in resolving conflicts and averting violence which

were used as bases for this study. It also reviews related studies on best practices of

community-based dispute resolutions in the Philippines as well as other countries and

its impact in the community.

Related Foreign Literature

Dispute and conflict are distinguished by Burton (1990) as cited in Spangler

and Burgess (2017) who states that “Disputes” are short-term disagreements that are

relatively easy to resolve and “Conflict” is a long-term, deep-rooted problem that

involve seemingly non-negotiable issues and are resistant to resolution. There will be

various opportunities along the way to resolve the dispute – personally, informally

(e.g., negotiation or mediation) or formally (e.g., tribunal), or it may be left

unresolved. Some disputes may go through several resolution processes, and a few

will progress to the formal court system (Braun & Schnabel, 2017).

Typologies of Disputes

The types of disputes dealt with by courts can be broadly divided into two (2)

types: criminal cases and civil cases. These two types are dealt with quite differently

and different processes and approaches apply. For example, there is a difference in

who ’prosecutes’ the case, as well as in the standard of proof and in the outcomes if

the case is proven (State Library new South Wales, n.d.).

 7

In community-settings, disputes vary from different topics such as:

Dispute between Families. These happen when a conflict occurs within the

family members. Family conflict refers to active opposition between family members.

Because of the nature of family relationships, it can take a wide variety of forms,

including verbal, physical, sexual, financial, or psychological. Conflicts may involve

different combinations of family members: it can be conflict within the couple or

between parents and children or, again, between siblings (Marta & Alfieri, 2014).

Disputes between Debtor and Creditor. A debtor is a company or individual

who owes money from the creditor and the latter is the one who lends the money.

Dispute between them may happens when the debtor fails to pay the debt (Chen,

2021).

Disputes between Consumers and Retailers. A retailer is one who sells goods

or services (Hameli, 2018) and a consumer is one who buys it (Comanescu, 2019).

Dispute happens when the purchased goods may be broken, faulty, inadequate, or

otherwise unsatisfactory (Honeyman, 2013).

Disputes between Neighbor Conflict. Disputes between neighbors occur

regularly. In fact, they are one of the most common types of civil disputes. Neighbors

can disagree about a number of issues, including property boundaries, parking,

responsibility for building or maintaining fencing, overwhelming trees, invasive

vegetation, unsecured leaf litters or rubbish, barking or dangerous dogs, loud noises or

offensive smells. The basis of these complaints is often minor; however, it is important
 8

that disputes between neighbors are resolved quickly and amicably unresolved

disputes between neighbors have the potential to deteriorate or escalate, making life

unbearable for both parties (Lawgovpol, 2018).

Disputes between Employees and Employers. These disputes may relate to

infringement of an employee’s rights in the workplace, such as salary, safety, working

conditions, equitable treatment, racial discrimination or sexual harassment

(Lawgovpol, 2018).

Disputes Related to Tenancy Conflict. Another common type of dispute relates

to the leasing or rental of property: most tenancy disputes are about occupancy,

evictions, recovery of unpaid rents or bonds, or cost for damage to property

(Lawgovpol, 2018).

Disputes Related to Accident. These disputes focus on events such as motor

vehicle accident, workplace injuries and other mishaps. The parties concerned may be

in dispute about the causes of accident, who was negligent or at fault and who is liable

to pay repairs, expenses or compensation. Clear, calm and thorough communication

between all parties will allow most disputes to be settled privately – in fact the

majority of disputes are settled without any form of legal action. However, when this

is not possible, or when communication breaks down, there are many legal avenues to

resolve disputes (Lawgovpol, 2018).

Dispute Related to Sexual and Gender-Based Violence. This refers to a type of

gender-based violence. Although men and boys are also target of gender-based and
 9

sexual violence in conflict situations, the victims of such violence continue to be

disproportionally women and girls (United Nations Human Rights, 2014).

Dispute Related to Real Property Conflict. Real property refers to immovable

properties such as land and buildings (Mares, 2013). Disputes related to it are mostly

inheritance issues, ownership and small-scale border disputes between neighbors

(International Organization for Migration, 2013).

Dispute Related to Personal Property Conflict. Personal property refers to

movable properties such as household goods, investments, and motor vehicles (Mares,

2013). Personal property issues can arise in the context of many types of disputes,

such as bankruptcy and creditor actions, insurance disputes, business valuation

disputes, and torts. The fundamental issues at the heart of such disputes typically

involve either the value or the financial damages related to the personal property

involved (Gosling, 2023)

Dispute Related to Violation of Dignity . Dignity is an expression of who

people are. It is not about their social status, financial assets, or worldly achievements.

Whether they experience successes or failures, self-compassion is to be maintained.

Their dignity derives from doing their best to live as an ethical human being (Amodeo,

2015). Violation of dignity includes: humiliation (Shultziner et al, 2012);

instrumentalization or objectification (Johnson & Cureton, 2022); defamation, slander,

and libel (Sember, 2023).

Dispute Related to Offenses against a Person. The term “crimes against the

person” refers to a broad array of criminal offenses which usually involve bodily
 10

harm, the threat of bodily harm, or other actions committed against the will of an

individual. Those involving bodily harm (or the threat thereof) include assault, battery,

and domestic violence. Additionally, offenses such as harassment, kidnapping, and

stalking also are considered crimes against the person (Findlaw.com, 2016).

Major Causes of Conflicts

Conflicts occur because of historical, cultural and economic changes that can

make people anxious. If people are repeatedly excluded, the anger will grow and may

escalate into a major conflict. The feelings and emotions, the hopes and aspirations,

the anger and the frustration that the changes bring up will often be carried into the

organization and affect work (Rengasamy, 2010).

In an article published by Simon Goode, author of “Understanding the five (5)

types of conflicts”, he discussed the following:

Information conflicts arise when people have different or insufficient

information, or disagree over what data is relevant. They may also be caused by each

party working on a different set of data or looking at the same data differently

(Vilendrer Law, 2023).

Values conflicts are created when people have perceived or actual incompatible

belief systems. Where a person or group tries to impose its values on others or claims

exclusive right to a set of values, disputes arise. It can also be caused by beliefs and

expectations about work conduct and behavior (Vilendrer Law, 2023).

Interest conflicts are caused when two or more group are competing for the

same thing. It can also happen when people want to avoid the same thing. Such
 11

conflicts may occur over issues of money, resources, or time. Parties often mistakenly

believe that in order to satisfy their own needs, those of their opponent must be

sacrificed. (Vilendrer Law, 2023).

Relationship conflicts occur when there are misperceptions, strong negative

emotions, or poor communication. One person may distrust the other and believe that

the other person’s actions are motivated by malice or an intent to harm the other. This

could be caused by misunderstandings in communication or it could be clashing

personality types that need different things (Vilendrer Law, 2023).

Structural conflicts are caused by oppressive behaviors exerted on others.

Limited resources or opportunity as well as organizational structures often promote

conflict behavior. This can also happen when there is unfair treatment and

discrimination within the organization (Vilendrer Law, 2023).

Strategies in Resolving Disputes

In a consolidated discussion in “Mediation and Facilitation” by Burgess

(2022), there are various strategies and tactics that may be utilized by the mediators in

resolving disputes. These consolidated discussions were contributed by different

professors and specialists in conflict resolution with their own published books, to wit:

Ripeness-Promoting Strategies. When parties involved in a dispute realized

they cannot win with further escalation, and the status quo is unacceptably damaging,

mediators then convince them that negotiation is preferable to continued confrontation

(Zartman, 2003).
 12

Convening Processes. The role of convening is to bring disputants to a

preliminary meeting where they will discuss the issues of a conflict and consider

options for its resolution. Tasks involved include assessing the conflict situation,

identifying key stakeholders and participants, introducing options for a resolution

process, and considering ground rules (Spangler, 2003).

Conflict Assessment. This is the initial first stage of mediation and the process

of determining what is going on, who is involved, what options for resolution might be

possible, what procedural approaches might work (Shmueli, 2003).

Ground Rules. These stem from a belief that all parties in a dispute resolution

process should be treated equally and fairly. These rules spell out behavior and

procedures that people consider fair, but tend to abandon when carrying on a fight

(Maiese, 2004).

Codes of Conduct for Intervenors. Just as ground rules set the codes of conduct

for participants, mediators also have codes of conduct. While some are negotiated on a

case-by-case basis, others are fairly standard and are specified in various existing

documents (Maiese, 2004).

Sequencing Strategies and Tactics. Mediators dealing with very large social

conflicts have to skillfully manage a very complex and diverse set of challenges. In

order to do this, these people must think about the best way to order or sequence the

issues involved in their conflict (Weiss & Rosenberg, 2003).

Creating Safe Spaces for Communication. Due to misunderstandings, distrust,

and prejudice, communication between parties is often difficult. There are various
 13

obstacles to effective communication and there are ways to create a supportive climate

in which parties feel comfortable discussing their differences (Chaitin, 2003).

Reframing. Framing refers to the way a conflict is described or a proposal is

worded; reframing is the process of changing the way a thought is presented so that it

maintains its fundamental meaning but is more likely to support resolution efforts.

"Parties can engage in reframing on their own, but it can be extremely helpful to have

a third party (mediator or facilitator) to guide the process (Spangler, 2003).

Option Identification. Option identification is an essential step in the process of

resolving any conflict. Once all parties to the conflict have identified the issues under

contention, they should systematically list all options that they see available to them

for advancing their interests. Often, this is the most creative step of the mediation

process (Spangler, 2004).

Focusing on Commonalities. Working towards a solution often requires that

parties both understand their differences and yet focus on their commonalities (Hauss,

2003).

Caucus. Caucuses are meetings that mediators hold separately with each side

of a dispute in order to keep mediation moving forward. They can be called by the

mediator or by one of the parties to work out problems that occur during the process.

There are basic steps of a caucus and their role in effective mediation processes. There

are also downsides of caucusing (Spangler, 2003).

Shuttle Diplomacy. Rather than allowing for the exchange of views and

producing compromise, direct communication between the parties may sometimes

 14

make the situation worse. The essence of shuttle diplomacy is the use of a third party

to convey information back and forth between the parties in cases where direct

communication is likely to be counterproductive (Brahm & Burgess, 2003).

Reality Testing. Sometimes, parties believe that they have an alternative or

option that is better than what they will get through participating in mediation. Reality

testing involves asking questions about each party's options and convincing resistant

parties that mediation is their best option (Spangler, 2003).

Costing. Cost-benefit analysis is a matter of analyzing the costs and benefits of

different options to determine what approach or solution to choose. Costing occurs

throughout the mediation process as parties decide whether or not to participate and

choose among settlement possibilities (Spangler, 2003).

Action-Forcing Mechanisms. These are mechanisms to get parties to move

ahead when one or more of the parties is stalling (Spangler, 2003).

Establishing Trust in Mediation. One important task for mediators is to build

and maintain the parties' trust of the mediation process, the mediators, and between the

parties themselves. When trust levels are high, parties are less defensive and more

willing to share information with other parties at the mediation table and in private

sessions with the mediator (Salem, 2003).

Related Local Literature

The Barangay Justice System in the Philippines has evolved from both

indigenous traditions and legal systems adopted from Western models (Disini et al,

2002). It was first recognized in 1979 under Presidential Decree No. 1508 as
 15

“Katarungang Pambarangay Law” and later amended and incorporated in R.A. 7160

also known as “The Local Government Code of the Philippines” (Gonzales, 2022). It

provides a friendly, inexpensive, and speedy forum for the settlement of disputes

where the parties can freely explore options for amicable settlements without resorting

to the courts (Vigo & Manuel, 2004).

Lupong Tagapamayapa is composed of the Punong Barangay as Lupon

Chairman, Barangay Secretary as Lupon Secretary, and 10 to 20 appointed Lupon

Members. To be appointed as a Lupon Member, the person must be a resident in the

barangay and possesses integrity, impartiality, independence of mind, sense of

fairness, and reputation for probity (Section 399, R.A. 7160). A Pangkat is formed

within the Lupon Members which serves as mediation panel over disputants

(Tabucanon et al., 2008).

The primary role of the system is not to decide disputes and impose a solution

on the parties but to assist the parties in discussing the possible amicable settlement of

their disputes. The 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. For this reason, the personal

appearance and participation of the disputing parties is necessary, while the non-

appearance of the parties will have corresponding sanctions. Also because of the need

for the disputing parties’ personal participation in the conciliation proceedings,

disputes involving non-natural persons like corporations are not subject to the

conciliation proceedings of the Barangay Justice System (Vigo & Manuel, 2004).
 16

Disputes that are within Barangay Jurisdiction

Vigo and Manuel (2004) summarized the cases that fall within the jurisdiction

of barangay which was derived from the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines, to

wit: unlawful use of publication and utterance, alarms and scandal, using false

certificate, illegal use of uniforms and insignias, physical injuries, giving assistance to

consummated suicide, responsibility of participants in a duel if only physical injuries

whether slight or less serious, maltreatment, unlawful arrest, inducing a minor to

abandon his/her home, abandonment of minor and person in danger, trespassing,

threats, coercion, formation, maintenance and prohibition of combination of capital or

labor through violence or threats, discovering secrets through seizure and

correspondence, revealing secrets with abuse of authority, theft, any real property and

land disputes, deceitful acts such as swindling or estafa, malicious mischief, simple

seduction, lasciviousness actions, threat with the use of publication, incriminating

innocent persons, intriguing against honor, issuing checks without sufficient funds,

and fencing of stolen properties.

Disputes that are outside Barangay Jurisdiction

Austral (2012) summarized the disputes that are outside barangay jurisdiction

such as: where one party is a government institution; where the object of dispute is

related to official function of a public officer; offenses punishable by imprisonment

exceeding one (1) year or a fine exceeding Php 5,000.00; offenses where there is no

private offended party; where the dispute involves real properties in different cities or

municipalities unless the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable

settlement by an appropriate Lupon; dispute involving parties who actually reside in

 17

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; such other classes of disputes which the President

may determine in the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the Secretary

of Justice.

Narvasa (1993) issued Circular No. 14-93 providing guidelines on the

conciliation procedure to prevent the circumvention of the revised Katarungang

Pambarangay Law. In order that the laudable purpose of the law may not be subverted

and its effectiveness undermined by indiscriminate, improper and/or premature

issuance of certifications to file actions in court by the Lupon or Pangkat Secretaries,

attested by the Lupon/Pangkat Chairmen, respectively, the following guidelines are

hereby issued for the information of trial court judges in cases brought before them

coming from the barangays and prior recourse thereto is a pre-condition before filing a

complaint in court or any government offices.

Strategies in Resolving Disputes

Tabucanon et al. (2008) noted that there are two types of strategies utilized by

the Lupong Tagapamayapa in resolving disputes such as:

1. “Comparison to the Courts” Strategy. In mediating disputes, the mediators

emphasize to the disputants that the delay, irritation, cost, and

embarrassment of going to court makes the court option less favorable than

a mediated settlement. He also notes that resorting to the court is also

criticized as foolish because, instead of controlling their own fate, the

 18

disputants are placing their futures into the hands of strangers who may not

understand the problem or their customs. There is the risk that anything can

happen in court and there is an obligation to society. If all people take their

cases to court, it causes delay and a lower quality of justice for everyone.

2. Determine who is Right and who is Wrong. To Western ears, this strategy

assigns labels of "winner" and "loser." But to the Pangkat mediators, this

method has a different connotation. The mediators often determine who is

right so he or she can be pressed to modify his or her legitimate claims and

forgive the loser. The loser is to be identified so that he or she can

apologize, have his or her guilt alleviated, and perhaps have his or her

obligations reduced. Therefore, in the Pangkat mediation, the winner

becomes a loser; the loser becomes a winner; and both are winners because

they do not need to litigate their dispute.

When pursuing these two types of strategies, the mediators perform an

evaluative function, utilizing moral and religious standards, in addition to laws, to

evaluate the disputants' behaviors. But when they find a legal violation or standard,

they unequivocally emphasize the law, with comments such as, "you committed a

felony assault and could spend almost a year in prison for what you did." Interestingly,

the Pangkat members will often take their mediations outside the mediation room

(Tabucanon, et al., 2008).

 19

Objectives of Barangay Justice System

The essence of a Barangay Justice System is a peaceful and harmonious

resolution of conflict within the barangay instead of adversarial proceedings in the

courts. Peaceful settlement of disputes among the family and barangay members

without going to the courts “is a time-honored tradition in the Philippines and is at the

root of a Filipino culture”. KP recognizes the traditional modes of dispute resolution

borne out of time-honored traditions of (1) Pakikisama (Community Spirit); (2) Utang

na Loob (Debt of Gratitude); and (3) Kinship. KP helps reduce the number of

indiscriminate filing cases that leads to congestion of court dockets. By compelling the

parties to settle their conflict through the intervention of the barangay, the animosity

generated by a protracted court litigation, which is a disruptive factor toward unity and

cooperation, is avoided. It is believed, however, that the KP law can be used to

achieve higher societal goals such as good citizenship and strong communities beyond

its originally intended purpose of decongesting court dockets (Austral, 2012).

Related literature on foreign and Local concept provides ideas on typologies of

disputes, its major causes, and strategies to utilize in resolving disputes.

Related Foreign Studies

According to Chapman (2012), in developing countries, particularly in cases

where individuals lack the financial means to pursue their conflicts through regular

courts, community-based dispute resolution is a widely adopted method. This

approach is commonly known as a "hybrid court". He described it as a variety of state

initiatives that seek to formalize and support community justice systems within the
 20

state justice system. He studied different practices of hybrid courts in countries such as

the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Sierra Leone, Nigeria

and South Africa. These hybrid courts emerged during the colonial period when

Western law was introduces for the foreign population, while accepting community

forms of dispute resolution to varying degrees. This acceptance of community dispute

resolution often involved elements of formalization, transformation and control by the

state, including the incorporation of local decision makers into the government

through hybrid courts.

In Bangladesh, village court was constituted under “The Village Courts Act of

2006” which was revised in 2013. This act was implemented due to constant lack of

justice to the underprivileged where there were petty issues arising like theft, robbery,

and land acquisition. Village court functions under the institutional framework of a

Union Parishad (Council). A Union Parishad (UP) is the lowest unit of local

government bodies, which according to law, “shall be consisted of a chairman and

twelve members”. Since there is a substantial feedback on the implementation of the

law, the government of Bangladesh now aims to nationalize such project (Hossain &

Zaman, 2016).

In Papua New Guinea, village courts began to operate in 1975 and have

expanded rapidly since then. Its function is to ensure peace and harmony in the

province for which it was established. The common types of disputes filed in these

court villages are striking a person, using insulting words, damage to property,

drunkenness in the village area, failure to perform customary duties or obligations,

sorcery, and other cases that may fall under their jurisdiction. Although it was initially
 21

intended to be informal procedures, no technical rules of evidence, ability to sit at any

time and in any place, and mediation of disputes, it became a new legal institution

within Papua New Guinea, and many magistrates were uncertain of the role they were

to perform. Although village courts are meant to apply custom to settle disputes, there

has been a tendency for magistrates to search for formal rules of law in order to exert

their authority and the authority of the court within the village, rather than relying on

local custom. On the other hand, the application of custom is not always an easy

matter. It is rarely in written form and the ability of the court to apply custom is

restricted to some extent by the limited knowledge of magistrates, who are not always

the older, more knowledgeable persons in the community. Younger, tertiary educated

persons are also chosen as magistrates. Since village courts are male-dominated

institutions, some women have accordingly been reluctant to bring disputes before

them for having doubts about the likelihood of a fair hearing and the inexperience of

women as public speakers have been given as reasons for this reluctance. Despite the

need for better improvement, nevertheless, for the most part, they have been

successful in achieving their purpose. Village courts, while not without their

difficulties, have clearly filled a gap in achieving order at the village level (Braun et

al., 2017).

In Vanuatu, island courts were established in 1983 shortly after independence.

It is regulated by statute “The Island Court Act of 1983” which was enacted in 1983

and has been amended a number of times. Just like village courts, a minimum number

of three justices comprise the court, one of whom must be “a custom chief residing

within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. It was legislated to determine matters of
 22

customary land ownership. In 2001, parliament stipulated that island courts would no

longer hear any claims about the ownership of customary land, as such claims would

henceforth be heard only by customary land tribunals established by the Customary

Land Tribunals Act, which came into force on that date. However, it was to be

ineffective since records showed that there were still 83 customary land cases yet to be

determined by island courts. They are also authorized to exercise such jurisdiction as

is defined in their warrants of establishment, which typically authorize them to hear

and determine certain minor criminal offenses under the Penal Code and other

specified legislation. For example, their criminal jurisdiction might include damage to

property, criminal trespass, abusive and threatening language, adultery, and theft.

From 1995 these courts have been authorized to hear minor traffic offenses such as

driving without due care or failure to comply with traffic signs. Their civil jurisdiction

often extends to minor contractual disputes and certain civil claims, for example,

disputes concerning ownership of land; claims in tort and contract not exceeding

50,000 vatu; civil claims under provincial bylaws; and applications for child

maintenance. In the exercise of their jurisdiction, island courts were intended to apply

customary law, provided it is not in conflict with any other written law or contrary to

“justice, morality and good order” (Evans, et al., 2010).

In Solomon Islands, native courts were established under the Native Court

Ordinance of 1942 and were given express power to deal with “native customs”. They

also had complete jurisdiction over matters relating to customary land. These native

courts were presided by the local headman: the chief. The courts’ place in the structure

of district administration. The district officer was assisted by a “district headman”

 23

who, among other duties, was president of the native court in the subdistrict. He was

not supposed to “meddle in religious affairs” but was to keep order, with the aid of

subordinates including an “assistant district headman” who was similar to a village

constable. Both the assistant district headman and the constable were members of the

native court, which also had a native clerk. The court was required to meet at least

once a month, and decorum similar to that of a magistrate’s court was enforced.

However, upon independence in 1978, the name “native courts” was replaced by

“Local Court”. Just like in Vanuatu, local courts were primarily meant to deal with

customary land disputes. Individual warrants are required to establish local courts.

While warrants exist establishing some 33 courts, in practice, there are some 18 courts

“on the books” following a consolidation in 2008, spread across five court districts.

The majority of these courts exist in name only, however, having no place to sit, few

or no personnel, and no individual budgets. There is some confusion as to how many

local courts sat in 2010. Records from the Central Magistrate’s Court indicate that

some six local court hearings occurred across the country. Despite having extensive

civil and criminal jurisdiction, the courts are presently hearing matters related only to

customary land disputes (Evans, et al., 2010).

In Southeast Myanmar, the community-based dispute resolution is called

“Justice Provision” and is characterized as legal pluralism due to wide range of justice

provider, different co-existing legal system, and varied justice perception. While the

Government of Myanmar has an official judicial system, but de facto the main Ethnic

Armed Organizations (EAOs) also have their own justice systems, laws and prisons.

Under this EAOs, there exists the Karen National Union (KNU), the New Mon State
 24

Party (NMSP) and to a lesser degree the Karrenni National Progressive Party (KNPP).

They are organized around three levels of ‘justice committees’ or courts with varying

levels of independence from the administrative and armed wings and can bring to trial

any criminal and civil cases. Unlike the GoM system, they have an institutionalized

system of referrals and appeals from the village level to the Supreme Courts (Kyed,

2018).

Kyed (2018) also notes the difference and traces of trends and patterns such as

the Local Justice Providers, organizations, women’s participation, and officials

mandates of local justice providers. Although there is a co-existing legal pluralism, all

unresolved community-based dispute will be heard and tried in the GoM official

judicial system.

Moore et al. (2022) conducted a study on utilization of Community-Dispute

Resolution in Syria initiated by the United Nation Development Program (UNDP) to

respond to its legal and protection needs. UNDP prototyped a model for CDR. The

CDR mechanism is culturally and context-aware, enabling Syrians to resolve various

types of disputes in a cooperative and amicable manner while upholding legal and

human rights. It provides a scalable model for dispute resolution services that can be

applied across Syria. The project’s data collection and findings illustrate efficient use

of local-level out-of-court resolutions, supporting a stable environment conducive to

enabling human rights and longer-term recovery. UNGPs are now widely used as

benchmarks to measure the performance, effectiveness and alignment of state and

non-state dispute resolution institutions and mechanisms to promote access to justice

and protect human rights. The UNGPs prescribe that such measures “should be
 25

implemented in a non-discriminatory manner, with particular attention to the rights

and needs of, as well as the challenges faced by, individuals from groups or

populations that may be at heightened risk of becoming vulnerable or marginalized,

and with due regard to the different risks that may be faced by women and men”.

Related Local Studies

The Philippines, with diverse cultural traditions and various ethnicities, has a

different practice of community-based dispute resolution based on the tribe’s customs

which passed down from generations to generations. The types of disputes in the

major islands of the Philippines differ from one another. In Luzon, the common

disputes are related to conflicts over livelihood sources and their ownership, whether

legal or illegal. Offenders are brought before councils of elders for severe reprimand

and required to compensate the other party (Ragandang, 2018).

In Luzon, the common types of disputes arise from conflict related to

livelihood sources and claiming (whether legal or illegal) thereof. Offenders will be

brought before the councils of elders to be severely reprimanded and he or she will be

required to compensate the other party (Barnes & Magdalena, 2016).

In Visayas, the common disputes arise from offenses against a person or the

murder of a family member. The justice system is based on the principle of vengeance,

where the bereaved family considers it a communal obligation rather than a personal

pursuit. Failure to seek revenge can lead to the perception that the crime committed is

justified and exposes the family to potential abuse from other community members.

Retaliation resulting in the death of members from the opposing tribe or family serves
 26

as a counterbalance for the loss. This practice, known as Kantang, involves leaving the

deceased unburied on a bamboo bed outside the aggrieved family's house until there is

a corresponding loss from the assailant's family or clan (Rio, 2016).

In Mindanao, the common disputes occur between rivaling families.

Traditional tribal leaders such as Sultans, Datus, or councils of elders, who are part of

the barangay government, are initially responsible for settling disputes in their

jurisdiction through a process called rido. However, if early intervention by the

traditional leaders fails, traditional conflict resolution procedures are employed. There

are two types of Maranao conflicts that can be resolved peacefully. The first type,

rido-o-totonganaya, involves conflicts within the same kinship group and is resolved

through the kokoman-a-kambetabata'a system, which emphasizes kinship and blood

ties. Punishments or damages imposed in such conflicts are minimal due to kinship

considerations. The second type, rido-o-sesalakawa-a-tao a damakamaolika, is a

lesser gravity conflict where an informally organized traditional court or committee

intervenes to maintain peace and order in the community. Relatives of the disputants

provide support to those involved in the conflict. If a conflict escalates into factional

violence with revenge and counter-revenge, both legal and traditional authorities often

become powerless to take decisive actions. Even law enforcers are hesitant to control

the heavily armed warring factions supported by their respective kin (Samaguina,

2000, as cited in Ragandang, 2018).

These practices were recognized not only by the ethnic community itself but

also in formal legal court. This is to preserve the tradition of these ethnicities

(Ragandang, 2018).
 27

Other studies related to Barangay Justice System conducted in different parts

of the Philippines focused on the implementation of the Katarungang Pambarangay

Law and effectiveness of the Lupong Tagapamayapa, to wit:

Dela Cruz et al. (2018) conducted a study investigating the effectiveness of

Lupong Tagapamayapa in conciliation process as practical way of delivering justice in

Barangay Caritan Centro in the City of Tuguegarao. Specifically, it determined the

functions of Lupong Tagapamayapa, the different cases brought before them, how

they administered conciliation, their efforts in reconciling parties, how effective they

are in issuing certification to file action, enforcing laws and their proper application of

the legal procedures. The result of the study found 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 proceeding successful through the observance of all the considered

aspects of effectiveness. Moreover, the Lupon is readily available and accommodating

in providing greater assistance by 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. The Lupong

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
 28

and exercises a deeper evaluation and investigation of the cases brought before them

in order to qualify with their compulsory function to harmoniously settle conflicts.

Similar study was conducted in Cauayan City, Isabela by Lupao and Alejandro

(2022) which focused on the challenges and innovations of the Lupong

Tagapamayapa. The result of the study showed that the Barangay Justice System is

effective. The themes that emerge challenging the mediators during settlement are:

disputants’ ability to comprehend, the challenge of persuading disputants who do not

cooperate for settlement, the of challenge of not exceeding from the mandated

authority of the Lupon in execution of agreement in selected cases and the challenge

of dealing with disputants negative attitude towards Barangay Justice System.

Innovations in amicable settlement are coordination with other government or non-

government agencies who have specialization with the dispute, on-site dispute

settlement and single-out counselling of both complainants and disputants and giving

sanctions and reprimand.

In Calauan Laguna, Gonzales (2022) conducted a study to determine the level

of implementation of the Barangay Justice System and community satisfaction thereof.

The study helped the Municipality of Calauan create an intervention program that will

surely help in decongesting the court dockets and improve the mediation process. The

result of the study showed that the implementation of the Barangay Justice System

was all fully implemented. The test of significant difference between the assessment of

Lupon Tagapamayapa Members and its constituents as regards the implementation of

Barangay Justice System was all greater than the level of significance at .05 which led

to the conclusion that there was no significant difference in the assessment of the
 29

respondents on the level of implementation of the Barangay Justice System in the

Municipality of Calauan, Laguna.

Synthesis

The researcher reviewed related literatures and studies in foreign and local

concept to gather different insights on the typologies of dispute in community settings,

its major causes, strategies utilized in resolving these disputes, and the effectiveness of

its implementation in the community.

Relative to typologies of disputes, foreign concepts discussed were typologies

of disputes and were categorized based on the subject matter and parties involved such

as: (1) dispute between families (Marta & Alfieri, 2014); (2) dispute between debtor

and creditor (Chen, 2021); (3) dispute between consumer and retailer (Honeyman,

2013).; (4) dispute between neighbors (Lawgovpol, 2018); (5) dispute between

employer and employee (Lawgovpol, 2018); (6) dispute related to tenancy conflict

(Lawgovpol, 2018); (7) dispute related to accidents (Lawgovpol, 2018); (8) dispute

related to gender-based violence (United Nations Human Rights, 2014); (9) dispute

related to real property conflict (Mares, 2013); (10) dispute related to personal

property conflict (Mares, 2013); (11) dispute related to violation of dignity (Amodeo,

2015); and (12) dispute related to offenses against persons (Findlaw.com, 2016).

However, there was no related literature found in the local setting. Instead, a legal

basis on cases that are within the barangay jurisdiction (Vigo & Manuel, 2004) and

outside the barangay jurisdiction (Austral, 2012) was found.

 30

Relative to major causes of disputes, related literature in foreign concepts,

(Vilendrer Law, 2023) discussed five major causes of conflict such as information

conflict, values conflicts, interest conflicts, relationship conflict, and structural

conflict. However, there was no related literature in a local text found.

Relative to strategies in resolving disputes, Burgess (2022) consolidated a

discussion on strategies in resolving disputes such as: ripeness-promoting strategy

(Zartman, 2003); convening process (Spangler, 2003); conflict assessment (Shmueli,

2003); ground rules (Maiese, 2004); codes of conduct for intervenors (Maiese, 2004);

sequencing strategies and tactics (Weiss & Rosenberg, 2003); creating safe spaces for

communication (Chaitin, 2003); reframing (Spangler, 2003); option identification

(Spangler, 2004); focusing on commonalities (Hauss, 2003); caucus (Spangler, 2003);

shuttle diplomacy (Brahm & Burgess, 2003); reality testing (Spangler, 2003); costing

(Spangler, 2003); action-forcing mechanisms (Spangler, 2003); and establishing trust

in mediation (Salem, 2003). These strategies were discussed on the basis of procedural

utilization. Related literature in local perspective only provided two common overall

strategies such as “comparison to the courts” strategy and “determine who is right and

who is wrong” (Tabucanon, et al., 2008).

For purposes of this study, since there was no related literature in the local

context that discussed the typologies of disputes filed in the barangay focusing on the

subject matter of complaint and the parties involved, major causes of these disputes

and the procedural strategies utilized by the Lupong Tagapamayapa in resolving

disputes, the researcher used the related literature in the foreign context as basis for

this study
 31

Relative to the effectiveness of implementing community-based dispute

resolution, foreign contexts such as: village courts in Bangladesh (Chapman, 2012);

village courts in Papua New Guinea (Braun, et al, 2017); island courts in Vanuatu

(Evans, et al., 2010); local courts in Solomon Islands (Evans, et al., 2010); justice

provision in Southeast Myanmar (Kyed, 2018); Community-Based Dispute Resolution

in Syria (Moore, et al., 2022) have similar effectiveness in practices in the local

context such as: in Luzon (Barnes & Magdalena, 2016); in Visayas (Rio, 2016); in

Mindanao (Ragandang, 2018); in Tuguegarao City (Dela Cruz, et al, 2018); in

Cauayan City (Lupao & Alejandro, 2022); and in Calauan, Laguna (Gonzales, 2022).

Studies in foreign and local contexts both showed similar practices of community-

based dispute resolution and its effectiveness in the community.

Conceptual Framework

The researcher made a draft to understand the whole study. It included

independent and dependent variables. The independent variables are the typology of

disputes filed in the barangay and its majors causes. The dependent variable of this

study are the strategies utilized by the Lupong Tagapamayapa in resolving disputes

and averting violence.

The conceptual framework of the study began with input to: (1) identify the

typologies of disputes filed in the barangay; (2) show the degree of occurrence of each

dispute; (3) identify the major causes of these disputes and its level of frequency; (4)

identify the strategies utilized by the Lupong Tagapamayapa in resolving disputes;

and (5) assess the effectiveness of these strategies.

 32

The processing of the data and information from input involved the collection

of data through from a structured questionnaire which were distributed to 8 barangays

in Poblacion (96 respondents). These generated data were organized and statistically

treated for proper presentation, interpretation and analysis to answer the objectives of

the study.

In anticipation, the output of the study would be used to assess the Barangay

Justice System in Poblacion, Cauayan City, Isabela.

 33

INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT

1. Typologies of Data collection Assessment of

disputes filed in the through a structured Barangay Justice
barangay questionnaire to: System in
Poblacion, Cauayan
2. Major causes of 1. Identify City, Isabela
disputes filed in the typologies of
barangay disputes filed in the
barangay
3. Strategies utilized
by the Lupong 2. Show the degree of
Tagapamayapa in occurrence of
resolving disputes disputes in the
and averting barangay
violence
3. Identify the major
causes of these
disputes and its level
of frequency

4. Identify the
strategies utilized by
the Lupong
Tagapamayapa

5. Assess the
effectiveness of
these strategies in
resolving disputes
and averting
violence

Data analysis and

interpretation

FEEDBACK

Figure 1. Paradigm of the Study.

 34

Figure 1 illustrates the paradigm of the study consisting of the Input, Process,

and Output (IPO) which is known as system analysis crafting the conceptual

framework.

The Input component comprised the contents of the questionnaire which

included the: (1) typologies of disputes filed in the barangay; (2) major causes of

disputes filed in the Barangay; and (3) strategies utilized by the Lupong

Tagapamayapa in resolving disputes and averting violence.

The process component included the data collection through a structured

questionnaire to: (1) identify typologies of disputes filed in the barangay; (2) show the

degree of occurrence of disputes in the barangay; (3) identify the major causes of these

disputes and its level of frequency; (4) identify the strategies utilized by the Lupong

Tagapamayapa and (5) assess the effectiveness of these strategies in resolving

disputes and averting violence. Analysis and interpretation of data was statistically

treated using descriptive design (ranking, frequency level, weighted mean, and

percentage).

This Input-Process-Output (IPO) system analysis is not a static framework. It

is dynamic which connects the output to the input as shown by a linkage of these

components revealing its relative connectivity as evidenced by a feedback arrow.