Sample Format of Thesis Manuscript

B U L AC A N S T AT E U N I V E R S I T Y - C O L L E G E O F L AW 1
PROPOSED THESIS TITLE
A Thesis Proposal Presented to the College of Law
Bulacan State University
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
Juris Doctor (with Thesis Program)
By
NAME OF RESEARCHER
December 2019
Certification of English Critic

Republic of the Philippines
BULACAN STATE UNIVERSITY
College of Law
Guinhawa, City of Malolos, 3000, Bulacan
English Editing Certification Form
This is to certify that I have edited this thesis/dissertation manuscript entitled:
___________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
Prepared by:
Name of Researcher____
_____________________
_____________________
and have found it thorough and acceptable with respect to grammar and composition.
Reviewed by:
Name of Grammarian:_________________
Designation/Affiliation:_______________
Contact Number:_____________________
Date:_______________________________
ABSTRACT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE …………………………………………………………………………. …i

CERTIFICATION OF ENGLISH EDITING ………………………………………….ii
ABSTRACT……………. ……………………………………………………………….iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ……………………...……………………………………… .iv
CHAPTER 1……………………………………………………………………………...1
I.Historical Background ………………………………………………………………..1
II.Statement of the Problem ...........................................................................................13
A.Major Problem of the Study ..................................................................................13
B.Minor Problem/s of the Study ..............................................................................13
C.Objective of the Study ................................................................................................13
D.Significance of the Study............................................................................................14
E.Scope and Limitation ..................................................................................................17
F.Definition of Terms......................................................................................................18
G.Abbreviations ..............................................................................................................20
CHAPTER 2 .....................................................................................................................21
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES ...........................................21
I.Review of Related Literature ..................................................................................21
1. Similar Courts in Other Countries .... ……………………………………28
II.Review of Related Study ........................................................................................31
AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991….......34
CASES UNDER KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY ...........................................42

CIRCULAR NO. 14-93 July 15, 1993.............................................................................59
CHAPTER 3 .....................................................................................................................69
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY .....................................................69
I. Research Design ........................................................................................... 69
II. Research Methodology ............................................................................... 70

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
I. Historical Background
The barangays are the smallest political subdivisions in the Philippines. The
Katarungang Pambarangay (KP) or Barangay Justice System (BJS) is an alternative,
community-based mechanism for dispute resolution of conflicts between
members of the same community.1
The Barangay Justice System provides a venue for disputing parties to
search for a mutually acceptable solution. Other members of the communities act
as intermediaries, facilitating the discussion of possible solutions.
The BJS formalized the Filipino tradition to seek help of community elders or
tribe leaders in resolving disputes between members of the same community, and
uses the Punong Barangay (highest elected official in a barangay) and the Lupon
members (committee of respected community members).
The Barangay has a Justice System or Katarungang Pambarangay. The
barangay captain heads a committee called the “Lupon Tagapamayapa” (Justice
of the peace) to mediate and settle disputes at the Barangay level. They do not have
1
(http://www.accessfacility.org/sites/default/files/Katarungang%20Pambarangay%20Handbook_0.pdf).
judicial powers as a court does, but rather attempt to resolve issues so the parties
can avoid going to court.2
Although the idea of Barangay Justice System was attributed to then Chief
Justice Fred Ruiz Castro who proposed the same to Fomer Pres. Ferdinand Marcos,
the concept of amicably settling disputes in the barangay level is not as new as we
seem to think. Even prior to the arrival of the Spanish colonials in the archipelago,
our early forefathers had already peacefully settled conflicts within the
community. The account of Fr. Juan de Plascencia on the Customs of the
Tagalog3 were most enlightening:
“Investigations made and sentences passed by the dato must
take place in the presence of those of his barangay. If any of the
litigants felt himself aggrieved, an arbiter was unanimously named
from another village or barangay, whether he were a dato or not;
since they had for this purpose some persons, known as fair and just
men, who were said to give true judgment according to their
customs. If the controversy lay between two chiefs, when they
wished to avoid war, they also convoked judges to act as arbiters;
they did the same if the disputants belonged to two different
2
(https://wikivividly.com/wiki/Katarungang_Pambarangay).
3
(http://www.gutenberg.org/files/13701/13701-h/13701-h.htm#d0e1500 (p. 170)).
barangays. In this ceremony they always had to drink, the plaintiff
inviting the others.”
This system of amicably settling disputes continued during the Spanish
regime, although informally and in limited extent, with the Cabeza de Barangay
acting as the datu. However, the cabeza de barangay only plays minor magisterial
authority as it was the primary duty of gobernadorcillos (municipal magistrates)
to settle civil cases arising between and among Indios (as the natives were called),
Chinese mestizos and Chinese.4
The Barangay Justice System was put to an end during the American
Regime with the imposition of American justice system, which is adversarial in
nature.
The first abstract conception of the Katarungang Pambarangay Law started
in 1976 when Supreme Court Justice Fred Ruiz Castro proposed the innovative
idea of settling disputes through “neighbourhood paralegal committee.” The
abstract conception of the law first saw a ray of hope for a possible passage of a
law when Presidential Decree No. 1293 was promulgated on January 27, 1978. It
created a presidential commission tasked with a duty of studying the feasibility of
instituting a system of settling disputes among the members in the barangay
without going to courts.
4
Crime, society and the state in the 19th Century Philippines by Greg Bankoff. Ateneo de Manila University
Press © 1996, pp99-100.
Presidential Decree (P.D) No. 1508 in year 1978 was the first KP Law that
institutionalized Katarungang Pambarangay. It was promulgated by then
President Ferdinand Marcos with the passage of Presidential Decree No. 1508 in
1978. The law took effect on December 30, 1978 and this was the law that
organized, established and institutionalized a formal system of amicable
settlement of disputes at the barangay level.
In the spirit of reviving Filipino tradition of peacefully settling disputes
within the community, then President Marcos declared the restoration of barangay
justice system under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law or PD 1508. KPL is an
extrajudicial system wherein disputes and minor civil and criminal cases are
settled within the barangay for speedy disposition of justice and also to minimize
referral of such cases to the court.5 Under PD 1508, a Lupong Tagapamayapa,
consisting of the Barangay chief and 10 other members, was created primarily to
resolve disputes and settle complaints within the community.
Although PD No. 1508 was the first law to organize, establish and
institutionalize the Katarungang Pambarangay, its real intent was to give full
recognition to the historical fact that peaceful settlement of disputes among the
family and barangay members without going to the courts is a time- honoured
tradition in the Philippines and is at the root of a Filipino culture.
5
Peace through Justice. Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno. Keynote address delivered on the first day of
the 2nd Barangay Justice Advocates Congress on December 3, 2007, at the Grand Men Seng Hotel, Davao
City, p3.
Fourteen years later, PD No. 1508 was repealed by RA No. 7160, otherwise
known as the Local Government Code of 1991. In the repealing law, the
Katarungang Pambarangay Law was incorporated as part of the codified laws on
local government. Sec.. 399 - 422, Chapter VII of R.A. 7160 are the relevant sections
on Katarungang Pambarangay.
The Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law under R. A. 7160, otherwise
known as the Local Government Code of 1991, effective on January 1, 1992 and
which repealed P. D. 1508, introduced substantial changes not only in the
authority granted to the Lupong Tagapamayapa (Lupon) but also in the procedure
to be observed in the settlement of disputes within the authority of the Lupon.6
In the late 1990s, the Philippine Supreme Court attempted to bring the
Barangay Justice System (BJS) under its purview, with the idea that the formal
courts could better provide “justice” to the people. This view was formed in part
because many cases successfully resolved by the BJS are in fact invisible to courts,
which receive only the cases that failed to reach settlement at the BJS level. In the
end, the move was quashed due to the outcry from local government officials and
public fears that, like the court system, the BJS would become inaccessible, alien,
and costly if managed by the Supreme Court. To date, the BJS has remained under
the supervision of the local government units.7
6
(ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 14-93).
7
(https://asiafoundation.org/2012/04/11/taking-a-hard-look-at-formal-and-informal-justice-systems-in-the-
philippines/).
In the words of Chief Justice Reynaldo Puno himself, the “Barangay Justice
System plays a vital role in addressing the weaknesses of our adversarial system
of dispute resolution”. The conciliatory character of BJS is much more attuned to
the Filipino culture of smoothing interpersonal and community relationship as
against the adversarial justice system which is more combative in nature, and
which is more “complicated” in nature.8 Moreover, BJS offers a more affordable
access to justice for our poor countrymen.
Since its first implementation via P.D. 1508 in 1978, the Barangay Justice
System has taken a much more active, wider role not only in settling disputes
among barangay members, but also in ensuring protection of women and children
from abuse, exploitation, and violence as provided for in RA 7610 9 , RA
9262.10 Through these, the barangay can issue Barangay Protection Orders (BPO)
or file complaints against violators of such laws.11
Even in the Philippine Judiciary System, this barangay conciliatory process
was acknowledged in 1993, when then Chief Justice Narvasa issued an
Administrative Circular instructing all trial courts against entertaining suits which
have not undergone through the barangay conciliatory proceedings.12
8
Peace through Justice. Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno. Keynote address delivered on the first day of
the 2nd Barangay Justice Advocates Congress on December 3, 2007, at the Grand Men Seng Hotel, Davao
City, p3.
9
(The Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act).
10
( Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act of 2004).
11
(https://brgyjustice.wordpress.com/category/history/).
12
(Administrative Circular No. 14-93 s. 1993).
The Katarungang Pambarangay was also an effective measure to decongest
court dockets and minimize delay in case disposition. 13
The Lupon is the Peace-Making Council in the barangay. The lupon is
created in each barangay and is composed of: (a) the Punong Barangay as
chairman, and ten (10) to twenty (20) members appointed by the Punong
Barangay.
The Katarungang Pambarangay is said to have three components: (A) the
Lupong Tagapamayapa; (B) the Pangkat ng Tagapagsundo; and (C) the Legal
Advisers.
The Lupong Tagapamayapa. It is the body organized in every barangay
composed of the Barangay Captain as Chairman and not less than ten (10) nor
more than twenty (20) members from which the members of every Pangkat shall
be chosen. Although the Lupon, as a whole, does not facilitate mediation or
conciliation proceedings, the members of the Pangkat which conducts mediation
or conciliation sessions are chosen from the members of the Lupon. The Lupon
may be assisted by the Provincial Legal Officer, City Legal Officer, Municipal
Legal Officer, and/or Public Prosecutor on matters involving questions of law
necessary in the administration of the Katarungang Pambarangay.
“Section 399. Lupong Tagapamayapa. –
13
(http://werdan88.blogspot.com/2009/10/critical-analysis-of-justice-system-in.html).
(a) There is hereby created in each barangay a lupong
tagapamayapa, hereinafter referred to as the lupon, composed of the
punong barangay, as chairman and ten (10) to twenty (20) members.
The lupon shall be constituted every three (3) years in the manner
provided herein.
(b) Any person actually residing or working, in the barangay,
not otherwise expressly disqualified by law, and possessing
integrity, impartiality, independence of mind, sense of fairness, and
reputation for probity, may be appointed a member of the lupon.
(c) A notice to constitute the lupon, which shall include the
names of proposed members who have expressed their willingness
to serve, shall be prepared by the punong barangay within the first
fifteen (15) days from the start of his term of office. Such notice shall
be posted in three (3) conspicuous places in the barangay
continuously for a period of not less than three (3) weeks;
(d) The punong barangay, taking into consideration any
opposition to the proposed appointment or any recommendations
for appointment as may have been made within the period of
posting, shall within ten (10) days thereafter, appoint as members
those whom he determines to be suitable therefor. Appointments

shall be in writing, signed by the punong barangay, and attested to
by the barangay secretary.
(e) The list of appointed members shall be posted in three (3)
conspicuous places in the barangay for the entire duration of their
term of office; and
(f) In barangays where majority of the inhabitants are
members of indigenous cultural communities, local systems of
settling disputes through their councils of datus or elders shall be
recognized without prejudice to the applicable provisions of this
Code.
Section 400. Oath and Term of Office. - Upon appointment,
each lupon member shall take an oath of office before the punong
barangay. He shall hold office until a new lupon is constituted on the
third year following his appointment unless sooner terminated by
resignation, transfer of residence or place of work, or withdrawal of
appointment by the punong barangay with the concurrence of the
majority of all the members of the lupon.
Section 402. Functions of the Lupon. - The lupon shall:
(a) Exercise administrative supervision over the conciliation
panels provided herein;

(b) Meet regularly once a month to provide a forum for
exchange of ideas among its members and the public on matters
relevant to the amicable settlement of disputes, and to enable various
conciliation panel members to share with one another their
observations and experiences in effecting speedy resolution of
disputes; and
(c) Exercise such other powers and perform such other duties
and functions as may be prescribed by law or ordinance.
Section 404. Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo. -
(a) There shall be constituted for each dispute brought before
the lupon a conciliation panel to be known as the pangkat ng
tagapagkasundo, hereinafter referred to as the pangkat, consisting
of three (3) members who shall be chosen by the parties to the
dispute from the list of members of the lupon.
Should the parties fail to agree on the pangkat membership,
the same shall be determined by lots drawn by the lupon chairman.
(b) The three (3) members constituting the pangkat shall elect
from among themselves the chairman and the secretary. The
secretary shall prepare the minutes of the pangkat proceedings and
submit a copy duly attested to by the chairman to the lupon secretary

and to the proper city or municipal court. He shall issue and cause
to be served notices to the parties concerned.”14
The judicial power extended to the Punong Barangay is mainly to promote
a speedy disposition of cases; however, this power is also extended to the members
of the Lupon Tagapamayapa for the observance of more judicious decisions. This
system may improve the quality of justice in the country; it will decrease the
number of indiscriminate filing of cases in courts and decongest the courts from
numerous cases filed thereto.15
When the chairperson of the committee, usually the Kapitan, receives a
complaint, Barangay law requires him to inform the parties and set a meeting for
mediation the following day. If after 15 days there is no resolution, than a more
formal hearing involving the pangkat or body, must be set. If there is still no end
to the dispute in another 15 days, then the complainant may file the case in the
trial court.16
If the conciliation proceedings before the barangay should fail, then you
may request a Certificate to File Action, so you can file the appropriate complaint
against your neighbor before the court or the office of the prosecutor. The
14
(Republic Act No. 7160, AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991).
15
(http://www.garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Feb2018/12.pdf).
16
(https://www.dayananconsulting.com/understanding-philippines-local-government-unit-system-foreign-
businesses-operators/).
certificate is a proof of compliance that you brought the matter before the barangay
before filing it in court.17
The lupon secretary shall issue certified true copies of any public record in
his custody that is not by law otherwise declared confidential.
Pangkat ng tagapagsundo is the conciliation panel that hears each dispute
brought before the lupon.
Legal Advisers. On matters involving questions of law necessary in the
administration of the Katarungang Pambarangay Law, the following shall render
legal advice; Provincial legal officer; City legal officer; Municipal legal officer; and
Public Prosecutor.18
II. Statement of the Problem
The main trust of this study is to provide a Critical Analysis on the
Effectiveness of the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law under Republic Act
R.A 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991 in Barangay
17
(https://www.manilatimes.net/all-disputes-generally-subject-of-barangay-conciliation/155694/).
18
(http://zabalketa.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Guide_to_katarungang_2012.pdf).
Taboc in the decongetion of cases of the Municipal Trial Court of Angat, Bulacan.
This study seeks to answer the following questions respectively:
A. Major Problem of the Study
1. How effective is the Katarungang Pambaragay Law in decongesting
cases of the Municipal Trial Court of Angat?
B. Minor Problem/s of the Study
2. How many complaints handled by the Lupon of Barangay Taboc were
filed before the Municipal Trial Court of Angat in the year 2013 - 2018?
3. How may the Municipal Trial Court of Angat be affected by the revised
Katarungang Pambarangay Law?
C. Objective of the Study
The main objective of this study is to provide a Critical Analysis on the
Effectiveness of the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law under Republic Act
R.A 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991, in Barangay
Taboc in the decongetion of cases of the Municipal Trial Court of Angat, Bulacan.
It also aims to accomplish the following:
1. To know the how effective is the Katarungang Pambaragay Law in
decongesting cases in the Municipal Trial Court of Angat.

2. To know the number of complaints filed before the Municipal Trial
Court of Angat that passed the Lupon of Barangay Taboc in the year
2013 – 2018.
3. To determine the effects of the Katarungang Pambarangay Law to the
Municipal Trial Court of Angat.
D. Significance of the Study
This study will serve as a useful material for the people who want to make
future researches on the effectiveness of the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay
Law under Republic Act R.A 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government
Code of 1991, in Barangay Taboc in the decongestion of cases in the Municipal
Trial Court of Angat, Bulacan. This paper will analytically provide new sets of
information, data and ideas on the essential purpose of the institution of the KP
Law and the possible effects of this law to the MTC of Angat. This can be helpful
in achieving their respective intentions.
This study will be beneficial to the following sectors of the society:
1. To The Municipality of Angat, Province of Bulacan

This study will serve as an eye - opener to the Municipal
Government of Angat to give more emphasis on conducting trainings
and seminars that will help in augmenting the perspective of the law
and evaluating the performance of the Lupong Tagapamayapa in all
barangays in the city. This study will serve as an assisting tool in the
reduction of filing of premature cases in the MTC after mediation and
conciliation proceedings of the lupon, and formulation of future plans
to lessen and/or avoid such instances in the future. This will also serve
as an effective tool in determining the possible effects of proceedings of
the Lupon to the MTC.
2. To The Residents of Barangay Taboc in Municipality of Angat
This study will educate the residents about the existence of a
lupon, and inform them that disputes within the ambit of the KP Law
may be peacefully settled even without the assistance of a counsel in
maintaining harmonious relationship in their community.
3. Members of the Katarungang Pambarangay Law implementing
officers
This study will provide valuable references and
recommendations to the members of the Lupon, in order to inform them
of their duties and functions as implementing officers.
4. Members of the Judiciary
This study will serve as an instrument to inform the members of
the Judiciary that their expertise in this law is a great help in augmenting
the knowledge and wisdom of the members of the Lupon. With their
great ability to cooperate they may help improve the Lupon’s practice
of mediation and conciliation proceedings which will benefit everyone.
The result of this study would serve as a source of information in
understanding that the KP Law is an effective way of promoting speedy
administration of justice, decongesting cases in the courts and providing a
peaceful and harmonious resolution of conflicts within the barangay instead of
adversarial proceedings in the courts.
Those who are contemplating to do research on this topic will have a guide in
the preparation of their research paper. The researcher learned to utilize library
facilities and internet sources to get related literature and studies to enhance the
research.
E. Scope and Limitation
This study will critically analyze the effectiveness of the Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law under Republic Act R.A 7160, otherwise known as the Local
Government Code of 1991, in Barangay Taboc in the decongestion of cases of the
Municipal Trial Court of Angat, Bulacan.
The key – personnel who participated in this study by answering questionnaire
includes the MTC Judge, Clerk of Court, Barangay Captain, members of the Lupon
and residents who personally experience being the subject of the KP Law.
The distributed survey questionnaire merely focused on the effectiveness of
the KP Law in the decongestion of cases in MTC of Angat, the effects of the law in
MTC, and the awareness of the members of the community in the existence of the
Katarungang Pambarangay in their community.
The study is limited only to Barangay Taboc and Municipal Trial Court in the
Municipality of Angat. Resource persons from the barangay assisted the
researcher in conducting the survey.

F. Definition of Terms
To ensure good understanding and appreciation of the research, these terms
are listed with their corresponding definitions. This can also help the readers to be
familiar with the words and their meanings.
a. Amicable Settlement – It is an agreement reached during mediation and
conciliation proceedings.19
b. Arbitration – It is a process wherein the third party from outside the judicial
system is chosen by parties to hear and decide their dispute.20
c. Complainant – Is a person who makes a complaint or who starts
proceeding against someone.
d. Complaint – It is a concise statement of ultimate facts constituting the
plaintiff’s cause and causes of action.21
e. Conciliation – It is a process wherein the Pangkat forgoes the power to
decide or recommend but assist the parties to isolate issues and options to
reach a settlement by consensus that jointly satisfies their needs22
f. Dispute – It is a conflict or controversy; a conflict of claims or rights; an
assertion of aright, claim, or demand on one side, met by contrary claims or
allegations on the other.23
19
20
Id .
21
Id .
22
Id .
23
https://thelawdictionary.org.
g. Effectiveness – It is the closeness of actual results achieved to meeting
expectations. Effectiveness ignores expenditure, while efficiency measure
worth of results. Efficiency is weighing results against costs over time, and
effectiveness is weighing results against expectations over time.24
h. Judiciary – It is pertaining or relating to the courts of justice, to the judicial
department of government, or to the administration of justice.25
i. Katarungang Pambarangay – It is a system of justice administered at the
barangay level for the purpose of amicable settling disputes through
mediation, conciliation or abitration among the family or barangay without
resorting to the courts.26
j. Lupong Tagapamayapa – It is a body organized in every barangay
composed of Punong Barangay as the chairperson and not less than ten (10)
and more than twenty (20) from which the members of every Pangkat shall
be chosen.27
k. Mediation – It is a process wherein the Lupon chairperson or Barangay
Chairperson assists the disputing parties to reach a settlement by consensus
that jointly satisfies their needs.28
24
Id.
25
Id.
26
Id .
27
Id .
28
Id .
l. Member – It is one of the persons constituting a partnership, association,
corporation, guild, etc. One of the persons constituting a court a legislative
assembly, etc.
m. Pangkat Tagapagkasundo - Is a conciliation panel constituted from the
Lupon membership for every dispute brought before the Lupon consisting
of three (3) members after the Punong Barangay has failed in his mediation
efforts.29
n. Respondent – It is the other side in a case which is the subject of an appeal.30
G. Abbreviations
a. KP - Katarungang Pambarangay.
b. MTC – Municipal Trial Court.
c. BJS – Barangay Justice System.
d. Lupon – Lupong Tagapamayapa.
e. Pangkat - Pangkat Tagapagkasundo.
f. DILG- Department of Interior and Local Government.
29
Id .
30
(Dictionary of Law, 2000).
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STUDIES
This Chapter includes a comprehensive discussion that covers related
literatures and studies. These are relevant since these will substantiate the results
of the study conducted.
I. Review of Related Literature
The Katarungang Pambarangay is a three-person mediation in which the
mediators are drawn from volunteers in the barangay. In rural communities,
"barangay" refers to "village," while in cities "barangay" refers to the smallest
political unit. Currently, in the Philippines there are 40,000 barangays and
therefore 40,000 Katarungang Pambarangay mediation centers.31
Lopez (2004), in his book entiled “The Law On Alternative Dispute
Resolution: Private Justice In The Philippines, How To Solve Legal Disputes
Without A Courtroom Trial says that the tri-party approach to mediation has
its counterparts in various other countries. In India, the village panchayat-
31
(http://www.gov.ph/catjlocalgov/default.asp ).
group of five-mediates in public to resolve any dispute brought before them.32
In Spain, labor disputes are mediated by a four-party mediation team.
When a police officer tells a complainant that his complaint must pass
through mediation in the Barangay Lupon before he can take action, it is not
his intention to disregard and take no action on the complaint for reasons
unfair to the complainant. The police officer may in fact be doing a favor to him
because of the mandatory character of the mediation in the Brgy Lupon being
a prerequisite before the case is filed in court. However, it has been observed
that the laudable purpose of the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law is
subverted and its effectiveness undermined by premature issuance of
certifications to file action by concerned Barangay Officials; and, likewise by
the improper referral of cases to the Barangay by police officers. This issue aims
to provide insights as to when the PNP should refer disputes to the Barangay
and when a police officer should entertain certifications to file action.33
32
JIM V. LOPEZ, THE LAW ON ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION: PRIVATE JUSTICE IN
THE PHILIPPINES, HOW TO SOLVE LEGAL DISPUTES WITHOUT A COURTROOM TRIAL, 59
(Rex Book Store, Inc. 2004).
33
(http://www.ls.pnp.gov.ph/July%202012%20Legal%20Advisories.pdf).
Katarungang Pambarangay
Section 399. Lupong Tagapamayapa. -
tagapamayapa, hereinafter referred to as the lupon, composed of
the punong barangay, as chairman and ten (10) to twenty (20)
members. The lupon shall be constituted every three (3) years in
the manner provided herein.
b) Any person actually residing or working, in the
barangay, not otherwise expressly disqualified by law, and
possessing integrity, impartiality, independence of mind, sense
of fairness, and reputation for probity, may be appointed a
member of the lupon.
(c) A notice to constitute the lupon, which shall include the
names of proposed members who have expressed their
willingness to serve, shall be prepared by the punong barangay
within the first fifteen (15) days from the start of his term of office.
Such notice shall be posted in three (3) conspicuous places in the
barangay continuously for a period of not less than three (3)
weeks;
opposition to the proposed appointment or any
recommendations for appointment as may have been made
within the period of posting, shall within ten (10) days thereafter,
appoint as members those whom he determines to be suitable
therefor. Appointments shall be in writing, signed by the punong
barangay, and attested to by the barangay secretary.
(e) The list of appointed members shall be posted in three
(3) conspicuous places in the barangay for the entire duration of
their term of office; and
(f) In barangays where majority of the inhabitants are
members of indigenous cultural communities, local systems of
settling disputes through their councils of datus or elders shall be
recognized without prejudice to the applicable provisions of this
Code.
(a) There shall be constituted for each dispute brought
before the lupon a conciliation panel to be known as the pangkat
ng tagapagkasundo, hereinafter referred to as the pangkat,

consisting of three (3) members who shall be chosen by the
parties to the dispute from the list of members of the lupon.
Should the parties fail to agree on the pangkat
membership, the same shall be determined by lots drawn by
the lupon chairman.
(b) The three (3) members constituting the pangkat shall
elect from among themselves the chairman and the secretary. The
secretary shall prepare the minutes of the pangkat proceedings
and submit a copy duly attested to by the chairman to the lupon
secretary and to the proper city or municipal court. He shall issue
and cause to be served notices to the parties concerned.
The lupon secretary shall issue certified true copies of any
public record in his custody that is not by law otherwise declared
confidential.
Section 412. Conciliation. -
(a) Pre-condition to Filing of Complaint in Court. - No
complaint, petition, action, or proceeding involving any matter
within the authority of the lupon shall be filed or instituted
directly in court or any other government office for adjudication,
unless there has been a confrontation between the parties before

the lupon chairman or the pangkat, and that no conciliation or
settlement has been reached as certified by the lupon secretary or
pangkat secretary as attested to by the lupon or pangkat
chairman or unless the settlement has been repudiated by the
parties thereto.
(b) Where Parties May Go Directly to Court. - The parties
may go directly to court in the following instances:
(1) Where the accused is under detention;
(2) Where a person has otherwise been deprived of
personal liberty calling for habeas corpus proceedings;
(3) Where actions are coupled with provisional
remedies such as preliminary injunction, attachment,
delivery of personal property and support pendente lite; and
(4) Where the action may otherwise be barred by the
statute of limitations.
c) Conciliation among members of indigenous cultural
communities. - The customs and traditions of indigenous cultural
communities shall be applied in settling disputes between
members of the cultural communities.

SECTION 413. Arbitration. –
(a) The parties may, at any stage of the proceedings, agree
in writing that they shall abide by the arbitration award of the
lupon chairman or the pangkat. Such agreement to arbitrate may
be repudiated within five (5) days from the date thereof for the
same grounds and in accordance with the procedure hereinafter
prescribed. The arbitration award shall be made after the lapse of
the period for repudiation and within ten (10) days thereafter.
(b) The arbitration award shall be in writing in a language
or dialect known to the parties. When the parties to the dispute
do not use the same language or dialect, the award shall be
written in the language or dialect known to them.
“If the barangay chairman fails to resolve the dispute, mutually agreed upon
third parties can be brought into the process. If the parties continue to fail in the
resolution process, then the parties may choose to enter the court system. The
advantage of the barangay justice system is that it is intended to create a win-win
solution and it can be quicker and less costly than the court system”, according to
Access, 2013.34
34
(https://www.niu.edu/cseas/_pdf/lesson-plans/fulbright-hays/philippine-political-structure.pdf).
1. Similar Courts in Other Countries
The Australian Law Reform Commission in its publication entitled as
“Indigenous Justice Mechanisms in some Overseas Countries: Models and
Comparisons” provide an overview of the Structure of Village Courts in Papua
New Guinea. The Village Courts Act 1973 accordingly provided for the
establishment of village courts to operate alongside the existing local and district
courts. The court’s function is to ‘ensure peace and harmony in the area for which
it is established by mediating in, and endeavoring to obtain just and amicable
settlement of disputes. If mediation fails the court has a compulsory jurisdiction.35
The judiciary of Solomon Islands is a branch of the Government of
Solomon Islands that interprets and applies the laws of Solomon Islands, to
ensure equal justice under law, and to provide a mechanism for dispute
resolution. Local courts have both civil and criminal jurisdiction when all parties
live within the area under that jurisdiction. Rulings are issued not by professional
judges but by community elders, applying customary law and local by-
laws. Sentences passed in criminal cases may not exceed six months
imprisonment, nor a fine of SI$ 200. A case may only be brought to a local court
once "all traditional means of resolving the dispute have been exhausted", and the
35
(https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/30.%20Indigenous%20Justice%20Mechanisms%20in%20some%20
Overseas%20Countries%3A%20Models%20and%20Comparisons/pa).
case has been submitted to local chiefs without the latter's ruling being satisfactory
to all parties.36
In Australia, the “community court” is not an actual court, but is the
commonly referred designation of the Court of Summary Jurisdiction of the
Northern Territory when dealing with indigenous offenders accused of crime.
This is to show its distinction from the usual procedures involved in that criminal
court. The court commenced as a twelve-month trial in Darwin and still continues
today. At present, the court only sits in Darwin. However, there is no barrier to the
court sitting outside Darwin if the court determines that it is necessary to do so.
The court allows the involvement of the Australian Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander communities in the sentencing process. It allows senior members of
the local community to be involved in and express their views upon the particular
and to be part of the sentencing process. The Court is conducted in a fairly informal
manner and is conducted with a view to enhance the reaching of an agreement
between the involved parties as to the most appropriate sentence to impose. The
court is innovative in that it incorporates the victim of the actual crime into the
restorative process.37
36
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_Solomon_Islands).
37
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_court).
Lopez (2004), says that the Chotei (conciliation) system in Japan has been
the preferred method for resolving disputes since the seventeenth century.38 It is
the favored method for reconciliation because the Japanese highly value
community harmony, and taking someone to court is seen as a breach of such
harmony.39
Popular justice reforms in Sri Lanka, initially promoted in 1949, were
modeled after local councils which had been in existence in the pre-colonial period
(Tiruchelvam, 1984).40 These Conciliation Boards were to handle local problems
through conciliation, compromise and informal procedures in a manner similar to
their village prototypes (1984: 76~-7).41
In China, the new forms of socialist legality claimed to build upon existing
systems of mediation. China has a long history of conciliatory forms of justice
rooted in clans and villages. After the Revolution of 1949, the government of the
People’s Republic of China implemented extra-judicial forums for family and
neighborhood problems, small civil problems and minor criminal offenses. These
forums used many of the same procedures and terminology as the traditional
system, such as mediation and social pressure (Li, 1978). However, they replaced
38
JIM V. LOPEZ, THE LAW ON ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION: PRIVATE JUSTICE IN
THE PHILIPPINES, HOW TO SOLVE LEGAL DISPUTES WITHOUT A COURTROOM TRIAL, 59
(Rex Book Store, Inc. 2004).
39
Id.
40
Tiruchelvam, Neelan (1984) The Ideology of Popular Justice in Sri Lanka: A Socio-Legal Inquiry. New
Delhi: Vikas Publishing House.
41
Id.
the authority of the clan and village with a legal forum more closely connected to
the state. (Tiruchelvam, 1984)42
II. Review of Related Study
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.43
It is only when the BJS has failed to resolve the dispute that the parties are
allowed to bring their case to court.44
Justice, as culled from Justinian and Plato’s Republic, simply means to “render
to each his due.” Its twin precept is equality of application in proportion to
inequality. It contemplates treatment according to what is desired. In other words,
if a crime is committed, the perpetrator must be swiftly prosecuted, judged and
meted with commensurate penalty, if found guilty.
A justice system is an organized means of regulating the lives of an individual
in relation to his fellow individuals and the State under a body of laws. The
individual as an offended party whose rights have been violated by others or even
42
Id.
43
(https://wikivividly.com/wiki/Katarungang_Pambarangay).
44
by the government is entitled to appropriate relief and the individual as an
offender who inflicts harm or injury upon another or violates any other laws of the
State, is also answerable in terms of punishment or other appropriate sanctions.45
The Court emphasizes 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.46
Barangay Officials do not have judicial powers. They are simply authorized to
do conciliation or mediation so that disputes that are within their jurisdiction will
no longer reach the courts and therefore will help in the declogging of court
dockets.47
In the case of Uy vs. Contreras, 1994, it may thus be observed that there has at
least three new significant features of the Katarungang Pambarangay Law, to wit:
1. It increased the authority of the lupon in criminal offenses from those
punishable by imprisonment not exceeding thirty days or a fine not exceeding
P200.00 in P.D. No. 1508 to those offenses punishable by imprisonment not
exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding P5,000.00.
45
Bringing Justice Closer to the People, (ROGELIO E. SUBONG)
46
G.R. Nos. 111416-17. September 26, 1994.
47
(http://www.accessfacility.org/sites/default/files/Katarungang%20Pambarangay%20Handbook_0.pdf)
2. As to venue, it provides that disputes arising at the workplace where
the contending parties are employed or at the institution where such parties
are enrolled for study, shall be brought in the barangay where such workplace
or institution is located.
3. It provides for the suspension of the prescriptive periods of offenses
during the pendency of the mediation, conciliation, or arbitration process. 48
The governing law when it comes to mediation in the barangay is, The Revised
Katarungang Pambarangay Law found in sections 399 to 422, Chapter VII, Title I,
Book III, and section 515, Title I, Book IV, of Republic Act Number (RA) 7160,
otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991 is the governing law
when it comes to mediation in the Barangay.49
48
G.R. Nos. 111416-17. September 26, 1994
49
(http://www.ls.pnp.gov.ph/July%202012%20Legal%20Advisories.pdf)
AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991
Republic Act No. 7160 October 10, 1991 Section 41(b) ; Section 43, Amended
by RA 8553
CHAPTER VII Katarungang Pambarangay
Section 399. Lupong Tagapamayapa. -
tagapamayapa, hereinafter referred to as the lupon, composed of the
punong barangay, as chairman and ten (10) to twenty (20) members.
The lupon shall be constituted every three (3) years in the manner
provided herein.
(b) Any person actually residing or working, in the barangay, not
otherwise expressly disqualified by law, and possessing integrity,
impartiality, independence of mind, sense of fairness, and
reputation for probity, may be appointed a member of the lupon.
(c) A notice to constitute the lupon, which shall include the names
of proposed members who have expressed their willingness to serve,
shall be prepared by the punong barangay within the first fifteen (15)
days from the start of his term of office. Such notice shall be posted
in three (3) conspicuous places in the barangay continuously for a
period of not less than three (3) weeks;

opposition to the proposed appointment or any recommendations
for appointment as may have been made within the period of
posting, shall within ten (10) days thereafter, appoint as members
those whom he determines to be suitable therefor. Appointments
shall be in writing, signed by the punong barangay, and attested to
by the barangay secretary.
(e) The list of appointed members shall be posted in three (3)
conspicuous places in the barangay for the entire duration of their
term of office; and
(f) In barangays where majority of the inhabitants are members
of indigenous cultural communities, local systems of settling
disputes through their councils of datus or elders shall be recognized
without prejudice to the applicable provisions of this Code.
Section 400. Oath and Term of Office. - Upon appointment, each
lupon member shall take an oath of office before the punong
barangay. He shall hold office until a new lupon is constituted on the
third year following his appointment unless sooner terminated by
resignation, transfer of residence or place of work, or withdrawal of
appointment by the punong barangay with the concurrence of the
majority of all the members of the lupon.

Section 401. Vacancies. - Should a vacancy occur in the lupon for
any cause, the punong barangay shall immediately appoint a
qualified person who shall hold office only for the unexpired portion
of the term.
Section 402. Functions of the Lupon. - The lupon shall:
(a) Exercise administrative supervision over the conciliation
panels provided herein;
(b) Meet regularly once a month to provide a forum for exchange
of ideas among its members and the public on matters relevant to
the amicable settlement of disputes, and to enable various
conciliation panel members to share with one another their
observations and experiences in effecting speedy resolution of
disputes; and
(c) Exercise such other powers and perform such other duties and
functions as may be prescribed by law or ordinance.

In the case of Espino vs Legarda,2006, the Supreme Court further enunciated:
“x x x As correctly stated by the Court of Appeals, the act of the barangay
chairman in issuing the certification enjoys the presumption that his official duty
has been regularly performed, absent any evidence to the controversy. Further,
the defendants-appellants did not object to the presentation of the certification.
Neither did they question said certification x x x”50
Section 403. Secretary of the Lupon. - The barangay secretary
shall concurrently serve as the secretary of the lupon. He shall record
the results of mediation proceedings before the punong barangay
and shall submit a report thereon to the proper city or municipal
courts. He shall also receive and keep the records of proceedings
submitted to him by the various conciliation panels.
(a) There shall be constituted for each dispute brought before the
lupon a conciliation panel to be known as the pangkat ng
tagapagkasundo, hereinafter referred to as the pangkat, consisting
of three (3) members who shall be chosen by the parties to the
dispute from the list of members of the lupon.
50
G.R. No. 149266, 485 SCRA 76 [2006].
Should the parties fail to agree on the pangkat membership, the
same shall be determined by lots drawn by the lupon chairman.
(b) The three (3) members constituting the pangkat shall elect
from among themselves the chairman and the secretary. The
secretary shall prepare the minutes of the pangkat proceedings and
submit a copy duly attested to by the chairman to the lupon secretary
and to the proper city or municipal court. He shall issue and cause
to be served notices to the parties concerned.
The lupon secretary shall issue certified true copies of any public
record in his custody that is not by law otherwise declared
confidential.
Section 405. Vacancies in the Pangkat. - Any vacancy in the
pangkat shall be chosen by the parties to the dispute from among the
other lupon members. Should the parties fail to agree on a common
choice, the vacancy shall be filled by lot to be drawn by the lupon
chairman.
Section 406. Character of Office and Service of Lupon
Members. -(a) The lupon members, while in the performance of their
official duties or on the occasion thereof, shall be deemed as persons
in authority, as defined in the Revised Penal Code.

(b) The lupon or pangkat members shall serve without
compensation, except as provided for in Section 393 and without
prejudice to incentives as provided for in this Section and in Book IV
of this Code. The Department of the Interior and Local Government
shall provide for a system of granting economic or other incentives
to the lupon or pangkat members who adequately demonstrate the
ability to judiciously and expeditiously resolve cases referred to
them. While in the performance of their duties, the lupon or pangkat
members, whether in public or private employment, shall be
deemed to be on official time, and shall not suffer from any
diminution in compensation or allowance from said employment by
reason thereof.
Section 407. Legal Advice on Matters Involving Questions of
Law. - The provincial, city legal officer or prosecutor or the
municipal legal officer shall render legal advice on matters involving
questions of law to the punong barangay or any lupon or pangkat
member whenever necessary in the exercise of his functions in the
administration of the katarungang pambarangay.
Section 408. Subject Matter for Amicable Settlement; Exception
Thereto. - The lupon of each barangay shall have authority to bring

together the parties actually residing in the same city or municipality
for amicable settlement of all disputes except:
(a) Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or
instrumentality thereof;
(b) Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the
dispute relates to the performance of his official functions;
(c) Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding one (1) year
or a fine exceeding Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00);
(d) Offenses where there is no private offended party;
(e) Where the dispute involves real properties located in different
cities or municipalities unless the parties thereto agree to submit
their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon;
(f) 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;
(g) Such other classes of disputes which the President may
determine in the interest of Justice or upon the recommendation of
the Secretary of Justice.

The court in which non-criminal cases not falling within the
authority of the lupon under this Code are filed may, at any time
before trial motu propio refer the case to the lupon concerned for
amicable settlement.
In the case of Estela L. Berba Vs. Josephine Pablo And The Heirs Of Carlos
Palanca, 2005, it says that under Section 408 of the Local Government Code,
parties actually residing in the same city or municipality are bound to submit
their disputes to the Lupon for conciliation/amicable settlement, unless
otherwise provided therein; If the complainant/plaintiff fails to comply with the
requirements of the Code, such complaint filed with the court may be dismissed
for failure to exhaust all administrative remedies.51
CASES UNDER KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY
1. Unlawful use of means of publication and unlawful utterances (art.
154);
2. Alarms and scandals (art. 155);
3. Using false certificates (art. 175);
4. Using fictitious names and concealing true names (art. 178);
5. Illegal use of uniforms and insignias (art. 179);
51
G.R. No. 160032. November 11, 2005.
6. Physical injuries inflicted in a tumultuous affray (art. 252);
7. Giving assistance to consummated suicide (art. 253);
8. Responsibility of participants in a duel if only physical injuries are
inflicted or no physical injuries have been inflicted (art. 260);
9. Less serious physical injuries (art. 265);
10. Slight physical injuries and maltreatment (art. 266);
11. Unlawful arrest (art. 269);
12. Inducing a minor to abandon his/her home (art. 271);
13. Abandonment of a person in danger and abandonment of one’s own
victim (art. 275);
14. Abandoning a minor (a child under seven [7] years old) (art. 276);
15. Abandonment of a minor by perons entrusted with his/her custody;
indifference of parents (art. 277);
16. Qualified tresspass to dwelling (without the use of violence and
intimidation). (art. 280);
17. Other forms of tresspass (art. 281);
18. Light threats (art. 283);
19. Other light threats (art. 285);
20. Grave coercion (art. 286);
21. Light coercion (art. 287);
22. Other similar coercions (compulsory purchase of merchandise and
payment of wages by means of tokens). (art. 288);

23. Formation, maintenance and prohibition of combination of capital or
labor through violence or threats (art. 289);
24. Discovering secrets through seizure and correspondence (art. 290);
25. Revealing secrets with abuse of authority (art. 291);
26. Theft (if the value of the property stolen does not exceed p50.00). (art.
309);
27. Qualified theft (if the amount does not exceed p500). (art. 310);
28. Occupation of real property or usurpation of real rights in property
(art 312);
29. Altering boundaries or landmarks (art. 313);
30. Swindling or estafa (if the amount does not exceed p200.00). (art.
315);
31. Other forms of swindling (art. 316);
32. Swindling a minor (art. 317);
33. Other deceits (art. 318);
34. Removal, sale or pledge of mortgaged property (art. 319);
35. Special cases of malicious mischief (if the value of the damaged
property does not exceed p1,000.00). (art 328);
36. Other mischiefs (if the value of the damaged property does not
exceed P1,000.00). (art. 329);
37. Simple seduction (art. 338);

38. Acts of lasciviousness with the consent of the offended party (art
339);
39. Threatening to publish and offer to prevent such publication for
compensation (art. 356);
40. Prohibiting publication of acts referred to in the course of official
proceedings (art. 357);
41. Incriminating innocent persons (art. 363);
42. Intriguing against honor (art. 364);
43. Issuing checks without sufficient funds (bp 22);
44. Fencing of stolen properties if the property involved is not more than
p50.00 (pd 1612).
Section 409. Venue. -
(a) Disputes between persons actually residing in the same
barangay shall be brought for amicable settlement before the lupon
of said barangay.
(b) Those involving actual residents of different barangays within
the same city or municipality shall be brought in the barangay where
the respondent or any of the respondents actually resides, at the
election of the complaint.

(c) All disputes involving real property or any interest therein
shall be brought in the barangay where the real property or the larger
portion thereof is situated.
(d) Those arising at the workplace where the contending parties
are employed or at the institution where such parties are enrolled for
study, shall be brought in the barangay where such workplace or
institution is located.
Objections to venue shall be raised in the mediation proceedings
before the punong barangay; otherwise, the same shall be deemed
waived. Any legal question which may confront the punong
barangay in resolving objections to venue herein referred to may be
submitted to the Secretary of Justice, or his duly designated
representative, whose ruling thereon shall be binding.
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 411. Form of settlement. - All amicable settlements shall
be in writing, in a language or dialect known to the parties, signed
by them, and attested to by the lupon chairman or the pangkat
chairman, as the case may be. When the parties to the dispute do not
use the same language or dialect, the settlement shall be written in
the language known to them.
In the case of Harold vs. Aliba , 2007, it discussed that the issue concerning
the alleged non-compliance of the amicable settlement pursuant to the mandate of
Section 411 of Republic Act No. 7160 or the Local Government Code (LGC) arose
because there was no formal document denominated as “Amicable Settlement”
signed by the parties. However, we agree with the similar holdings of the Court
of Appeals and the RTC that the requirements under Section 411 of the LGC had
been substantially complied with. The minutes of the barangay conciliation
proceedings readily disclose the terms agreed upon by the parties for the
settlement of their dispute, and that the acknowledgment receipt, which was
written in a language known to the parties, signed by them, attested to by
the Lupon Chairman, and witnessed by several barangay officials, serves as an
indubitable proof of the amicable settlement and of the substantial compliance of
its terms by respondent Aliba.52
52
G.R. No. 130864. October 2, 2007
In the case of Zamora vs. Heirs of Carmen Izquierdo, 2004, it says that the
primordial objective of Presidential Decree No. 1508 (the Katarungang
Pambarangay Law), now included under R.A. No. 7160 (the Local Government
Code of 1991), is to reduce the number of court litigations and prevent the
deterioration of the quality of justice which has been brought about by the
indiscriminate filing of cases in the courts. To attain this objective, Section 412(a)
of R.A. No. 7160 requires the parties to undergo a conciliation process before
the Lupon Chairman or the Pangkat as a precondition to filing a complaint in
court, thus: “SECTION 412. Conciliation.—(a) Pre-condition to Filing of
Complaint in Court.—No complaint, petition, action, or proceeding involving any
matter within the authority of the Lupon shall be filed or instituted directly in
court or any other government office for adjudication, unless there has been a
confrontation between the parties before the lupon chairman or the pangkat, and
that no conciliation or settlement has been reached as certified by the lupon or
pangkat secretary and attested to by the lupon or pangkat chairman x x x.”53
Section 412. Conciliation. -
(a) Pre-condition to Filing of Complaint in Court. - No complaint,
petition, action, or proceeding involving any matter within
53
G.R. No. 146195. November 18, 2004
the authority of the lupon shall be filed or instituted directly
in court or any other government office for adjudication,
unless there has been a confrontation between the parties
before the lupon chairman or the pangkat, and that no
conciliation or settlement has been reached as certified by the
lupon secretary or pangkat secretary as attested to by the
lupon or pangkat chairman or unless the settlement has been
repudiated by the parties thereto.
Pang- et vs. Manacnes, 2007, enunciated that “What is compulsory under
the Katarungang Pambarangay Law is that there be a confrontation between the
parties before the Lupon Chairman or the Pangkat and that a certification be
issued that no conciliation or settlement has been reached, as attested to by the
Lupon or Pangkat Chairman, before a case falling within the authority of the
Lupon may be instituted in court or any other government office for adjudication.
In other words, the only necessary pre-condition before any case falling within
the authority of the Lupon or the Pangkat may be filed before a court is that
there has been personal confrontation between the parties but despite earnest
efforts to conciliate, there was a failure to amicably settle the dispute. Xxx xxx
“.54
54
(Pang-et vs. Manacnes, , 2007)
(b) Where Parties May Go Directly to Court. - The parties may go
directly to court in the following instances:
(1) Where the accused is under detention;
(2) Where a person has otherwise been deprived of personal
liberty calling for habeas corpus proceedings;
(3) Where actions are coupled with provisional remedies such
as preliminary injunction, attachment, delivery of personal property
and support pendente lite; and
(4) Where the action may otherwise be barred by the statute
of limitations.
(c) Conciliation among members of indigenous cultural
communities. - The customs and traditions of indigenous cultural
communities shall be applied in settling disputes between members
of the cultural communities.
Conciliators and mediators do not render a decision on a controversy. They
merely persuade the parties to arrive at making reciprocal concessions that lead to
an amicable settlement thereof. The result of a conciliated settlement is mutually

beneficial and since no one has been condemned as having acted wrongly, the
harmonious relationship between the parties is restored.55
SECTION 413. Arbitration. –
(a) The parties may, at any stage of the proceedings, agree in
writing that they shall abide by the arbitration award of the lupon
chairman or the pangkat. Such agreement to arbitrate may be
repudiated within five (5) days from the date thereof for the same
grounds and in accordance with the procedure hereinafter
prescribed. The arbitration award shall be made after the lapse of the
period for repudiation and within ten (10) days thereafter.
(b) The arbitration award shall be in writing in a language or
dialect known to the parties. When the parties to the dispute do not
use the same language or dialect, the award shall be written in the
language or dialect known to them.
Home Bankers Savings and Trust Company vs. Court of Appeals, 1999,
emphasized that arbitration, as an alternative method of dispute resolution, is
encouraged by this Court. Aside from unclogging judicial dockets, it also hastens
solutions especially of commercial disputes. The Court looks with favor upon such
55
(https://dirp3.pids.gov.ph/ris/taps/tapspp9926.pdf)
amicable arrangement and will only interfere with great reluctance to anticipate
or nullify the action of the arbitrator.56
A judge and an arbitrator are alike in their function of rendering a decision
to resolve a dispute. Although arbitration may be less formal and not as strict in
adherence to technical rules of procedure and evidence, both modes follow the
same method of adversarial justice. The complainant asserts a claim that is denied
by the other. Cross-examination of a witness is the method of ascertaining the truth
of the conflicting claims and defenses. The result of the process is that one party
emerges the victor and the other the vanquished. One is declared right and the
other wrong. An arbitration proceeding, however, has the advantage of being
constituted ad hoc or for a particular case.
An arbitrator’s attention and study being thus narrowly focused, the
controversy is decided much more expeditiously than a judge who must deal with
tens if not hundreds of cases at the same time.
SECTION 414. Proceedings Open to the Public; Exception. –
All proceedings for settlement shall be public and informal:
Provided, however, That the lupon chairman or the pangkat
chairman, as the case may be, may motu proprio or upon request of
56
G.R. No. 115412. November 19, 1999
a party, exclude the public from the proceedings in the interest of
privacy, decency, or public morals.
SECTION 415. Appearance of Parties in Person. –
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.
Section 416. 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.
However, this provision shall not apply to court cases settled by
the lupon under the last paragraph of Section 408 of this Code, in
which case the compromise or the pangkat chairman shall be
submitted to the court and upon approval thereof, have the force and
effect of a judgment of said court.
Section 417. Execution. - The amicable settlement or arbitration
award may be enforced by execution by the lupon within six (6)

months from the date of the settlement. After the lapse of such time,
the settlement may be enforced by action in the appropriate city or
municipal court.
Vidal vs Escueta, 2003, enunciated that the amicable settlement which is
not repudiated within the period therefor may be enforced by execution by the
Lupon through the Punong Barangay within a time line of six months and if not
so enforced by the Lupon after the lapse of the said period it may be enforced
only by an action in the proper city or municipal court.57
Section 418. Repudiation. - Any party to the dispute may, within
ten (10) days from the date of the settlement, repudiate the same by
filing with the lupon chairman a statement to that effect sworn to
before him, where the consent is vitiated by fraud, violence, or
intimidation. Such repudiation shall be sufficient basis for the
issuance of the certification for filing a complaint as hereinabove
provided.
Section 419. Transmittal of Settlement and Arbitration. -
Award to the Court. - The secretary of the lupon shall transmit the
settlement or the arbitration award to the appropriate city or
municipal court within five (5) days from the date of the award or
57
G.R. No. 156228. December 10, 2003.
from the lapse of the ten-day period repudiating the settlement and
shall furnish copies thereof to each of the parties to the settlement
and the lupon chairman.
Section 420. Power to Administer Oaths. - The punong
barangay, as chairman of the lupong tagapamayapa, and the
members of the pangkat are hereby authorized to administer oaths
in connection with any matter relating to all proceedings in the
implementation of the katarungang pambarangay.
Section 421. Administration; Rules and Regulations. - The city
or municipal mayor, as the case may be, shall see to the efficient and
effective implementation and administration of the katarungang
pambarangay. The Secretary of Justice shall promulgate the rules
and regulations necessary to implement this Chapter.
Section 422. Appropriations. - Such amount as may be necessary
for the effective implementation of the katarungang pambarangay
shall be provided for in the annual budget of the city or municipality
concerned.
Section 515. Refusal or Failure of Any Party or Witness to
Appear before the Lupon or Pangkat. – Refusal or willful failure of
any party or witness to appear before the lupon or pangkat in

compliance with a summons issued pursuant to the provisions on
the Katarungang Pambarangay under Chapter 7, Title I of Book III
of this Code may be punished by the city or municipal court as for
indirect contempt of court upon application filed therewith by the
lupon chairman, the pangkat chairman, or by any of the contending
parties. Such refusal or willful failure to appear shall be reflected in
the records of the lupon secretary or in the minutes of the pangkat
secretary and shall bar the complainant who fails to appear, from
seeking judicial recourse for the same cause of action, and the
respondent who refuses to appear, from filing any counterclaim
arising out of, or necessarily connected with the complaint.
A pangkat member who serves as such shall be entitled to an
honorarium, the amount of which is to be determined by the
sanggunian concerned, subject to the provisions in this Code cited
above.58
Popular justice is also justified as growing out of or recreating indigenous
ordering. For example, the Philippine system of barangay justice, implemented in
1978, is justified by the claim that the new reform builds on pre-colonial traditions
58
Republic Act No. 7160 October 10, 1991 Section 41(b) ;Section 43, Amended by RA 8553
AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991.
of amicable dispute settlement (Pe and Tadiar, 1979).59 When the Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court, Fred Ruiz Castro, first advocated the creation of such
’neighborhood para-legal committees’ in 1976, he described the reasons for this
choice of forum as an intended throwback to Pre-Hispanic times ... it is inspired
by the realization that in spite of the intrusions into the Filipino psyche of the isms
of alien civilization, the Filipino has retained an admirable degree of honor and
respect for his elders. (Quoted in Tan and Pulido, 1981: 427)60
Bonifacio Law Office vs. Bellosillo, 2002, discussed evidently that the
barangay failed to exert enough effort required by law to conciliate between the
parties and to settle the case before it. Hence, respondent judge was not incorrect
in remanding the case to it for completion of the mandated proceedings. We
cannot fault him for seeking to promote the objectives of barangay conciliation and
for taking to heart the provisions of Supreme Court Circular No. 14-93. 61 His
referral of the case back to the barangay cannot be equated with gross ignorance
of the law. Neither does it constitute grave abuse of discretion or obvious
partiality.62
59
Pe, Cecilio L. and Alfredo F. Tadiar (1979) Katarungang Pambarangay: Dynamics of Compulsory
Conciliation. Manila: UST Press.
60
Tan, Bayani K. and Ma. Gracia M. Pulido (1981) ’Katarungang Pambarangay Law: Its Goals, Processes
and Impact on the Right Against Self-Incrimination’, Philippine Law Journal 56: 425-38.
61
(14-93.)
62
A.M. No. MTJ-00-1308. December 16, 2002.
CIRCULAR NO. 14-93 July 15, 1993
TO: ALL REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS, METROPOLITAN TRIAL
COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS AND MUNICIPAL
CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS
SUBJECT: GUIDELINES ON THE KATARUNGANG
PAMBARANGAY CONCILIATION PROCEDURE TO PREVENT
CIRCUMVENTION OF THE REVISED KATARUNGANG
PAMBARANGAY LAW (SECTIONS 399-422, CHAPTER VII, TITLE
I, BOOK III, R.A. 7160. OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE LOCAL
GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991).
The Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law under
R.A. 7160, otherwise known as the local Government Code of
1991, effective on January 1, 1992, and which repealed P.D.
1508, introduced substantial changes not only in the authority
granted to the Lupong Tagapamayapa but also in the
procedure to be observed in the settlement of disputes within
the authority of the Lupon.
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:
I. 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:
1. Where one party is the government, or any
subdivision or instrumentality thereof;
2. Where one party is a public officer or employee, and
the dispute relates to the performance of his official
functions;
3. 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;
4. Any complaint by or against corporations,
partnership 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);
5. 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;
6. Offenses for which the law prescribes a maximum
penalty of imprisonment exceeding one (1) year or a
fine over five thousand pesos (P5,000.00);
7. Offenses where there is no private offended party;
8. 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 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.
9. Any class of disputes which the President may
determine in the interest of justice or upon the
recommendation of the Secretary of Justice;

10. Where the dispute arises from the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) (Sec. 46 & 47, R.A. 6657);
11. 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);
12. Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise
which may be filed directly in court (See Sanchez vs.
Tupaz, 158 SCRA 459).
II. Under the provisions of R.A. 7160 on Katarungang
Pambarangay conciliation, as implemented by the
Katarungang Pambarangay Rules and Regulations
promulgated by the Secretary of Justice, the certification for
filing a complaint in court or any government office shall be
issued by Barangay authorities only upon compliance with
the following requirements:

1. Issued by the Lupon Secretary and attested by the
Lupon Chairman (Punong Barangay), certifying that a
confrontation of the parties has taken place and that a
conciliation settlement has been reached, but the same
has been subsequently repudiated (Sec. 412, Revised
Katarungang Pambarangay Law; Sec. 2[h], Rule III,
Katarungang Pambarangay Rules);
2. Issued by the Pangkat Secretary and attested by the
Pangkat Chairman, certifying that:
a. a confrontation of the parties took
place but no conciliation/settlement has
been reached (Sec. 4[f], Rule III,
Katarungang Pambarangay Rules; or
b. that no personal confrontation took
place before the Pangkat through no
fault of the complainant (Sec. 4[f], Rule
III, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules).
3. Issued by the Punong Barangay, as requested by the
proper party on the ground of failure of settlement
where the dispute involves members of the same

indigenous cultural community, which 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, and there has been no settlement as
certified by the datu or tribal leader or elder to the
Punong Barangay of place of settlement (Secs. 1,4 & 5,
Rule IX, Katarungang Pambarangay Rules); and
4. If mediation or conciliation efforts before the Punong
Barangay proved unsuccessful, there having been no
agreement to arbitrate (Sec. 410 [b], Revised
Katarungang Pambarangay Law; Sec. 1, c. (1), Rule III,
Katarungang Pambarangay Rules), or where the
respondent fails to appear at the mediation proceeding
before the Punong Barangay (3rd par. Sec. 8, a, Rule VI,
Katarungang Pambarangay Rules), the Punong
Barangay shall not cause the issuance at this stage of a
certification to file action, because it is now mandatory
for him to constitute the Pangkat before whom

mediation, conciliation, or arbitration proceedings
shall be held.
III. All complaints and/or informations filed or raffled
to your sala/branch of the Regional Trial Court shall be
carefully read and scrutinized to determine if there has been
compliance with prior Barangay conciliation procedure
under the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law and its
Implementing Rules and Regulations, as a pre-condition to
judicial action, particularly whether the certification to file
action attached to the records of the case comply with the
requirements hereinabove enumerated in par. II;
IV. A case filed in court without compliance with prior
Barangay conciliation which is a pre-condition for formal
adjudication (Sec. 412 [a] of the Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law) may be dismissed upon motion of
defendant/s, not for lack of jurisdiction of the court but for
failure to state a cause of action or prematurity (Royales vs.
IAC, 127 SCRA 470; Gonzales vs. CA, 151 SCRA 289), or the
court may suspend proceedings upon petition of any party
under Sec. 1, Rule 21 of the Rules of Court; and refer the
case motu proprio to the appropriate Barangay authority,

applying by analogy Sec. 408 [g], 2nd par., of the Revised
Katarungang Pambarangay Law which reads as follows:
The court in which non-criminal cases not falling
within the authority of the Lupon under this Code are
filed may at any time before trial, motu proprio refer
case to the Lupon concerned for amicable settlement.
Strict observance of these guidelines is enjoined. This
Administrative Circular shall be effective immediately.63
Uy vs. Contreras, 1994, enunciated that the total unawareness of the Local
Government Code of 1991, more specifically on the provisions on the katarungang
pambarangay, is distressing. He should have taken judicial notice thereof, ever
mindful that under c, courts are mandatorily required to take judicial notice of
“the official acts of the legislative, executive and judicial departments of the
Philippines.” We have ruled that a judge is called upon to exhibit more than just a
cursory acquaintance with the statutes and procedural rules. He should have
applied the revised katarungang pambarangay law under the Local Government
Code of 1991. Had he done so, this petition would not have reached us and taken
63
CIRCULAR NO. 14-93
valuable attention and time which could have been devoted to more important
cases.64
Section 1, Rule 129. Judicial notice, when mandatory. — A
court shall take judicial notice, without the introduction of evidence,
of the existence and territorial extent of states, their political history,
forms of government and symbols of nationality, the law of nations,
the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals, the
political constitution and history of the Philippines, the official acts
of legislative, executive and judicial departments of the Philippines,
the laws of nature, the measure of time, and the geographical
divisions. (1a)65
Absence of prior mediation pursuant to the katarungang pambarangay law
bars the filing of the complaint with the court.66
64
G.R. Nos. 111416-17. September 26, 1994.
65
https://www.lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_128-134_evidence.html
66
Id
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
This Chapter presents the research design and method, research instruments,
validation of the instruments, procedure in gathering data and statistical treatment
of data.
I. Research Design
There are different methods that can be used in researching. You can use a
descriptive, historical or experimental method. It is a design to conceptualize the
study and its specific aims and purposes.
The researcher used the descriptive method of research to obtain significant
information in this study. This method is employed to gather, synthesize, and
analyze the data which will be derived from the respondents’ answers through
market survey questionnaires. This study is established for the purpose of
analyzing the effectiveness of the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law under
Republic Act R.A 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991
in Barangay Taboc in the decongestion of cases of the Municipal Trial Court of

Angat, Bulacan. Results derived from the respondents of the research served as
the basis for conducting the study.
The researcher also used the analytical method of research. The researcher
had to use facts or information already available, and analyzed them to make a
critical evaluation of the material.
II. Research Methodology
A. Instruments and Technical Word
The researcher made use of a questionnaire to gather data. Library research
was also undertaken as a helpful activity to deepen and widen knowledge and
come up with good ideas.
Primary data were gathered using survey questionnaire disseminated to
the respondents.
Secondary sources of data such as other references found in the library and
Internet sources were utilized for the study.
B. Sampling Procedure
The researcher distributed survey questionnaire to the Municipal Trial
Court Judge of Angat and its Clerk of Court, Barangay Captain, Members of the
Lupon, complainants and residents of Barangay Taboc. The total number of

residents in the area was used as reference to obtain the sample population. The
population information was provided by the Municipal Trial Court of Angat and
Barangay of Taboc.
C. Procedures in Gathering Data
The following were the procedures undergone by the researcher in the
gathering of data.
a. Sought the approval of the Barangay Captain of Taboc and
Municipal Trial court of Angat for the conduct of the study;
b. Distributed personally the survey questionnaires to the respondents
of the study;
c. Collected the survey questionnaires from the respondents;
d. Scanned, tabulated and encoded the results of the survey based on
the problems of the study;
e. Interpreted and analyzed the data in tabular and textual
presentation with due consideration to the sub - problems of the
study; and
f. Encoded and edited the manuscript for the final defense.
D. Statistical Treatment of Data
The data that were gathered from the respondents were tallied, tabulated
and later analyzed using appropriate statistical tools. Data collected from the
respondents were subjected to statistical treatment. The formula to be used is as
follows.
1. SLOVINS FORMULA67 is used to calculate the sample size (n) given the
population size (N) and a margin of error (e). It is a random sampling technique
formula to estimate sampling size. It is computed as
n = N / (1+Ne2).
whereas:
n = no. of samples
N = total population
e = error margin / margin of error
2. Percentage is used to establish the profile of the respondents of the study.
P = F x 100
67
https://prudencexd.weebly.com/
Bibliography
BOOKS
JIM V. LOPEZ. (2004). THE LAW ON ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION:
PRIVATE JUSTICE IN THE PHILIPPINES, How To SOLVE LEGAL
DISPUTES WITHOUT A CouRTRooM TRIAL, 59 . Rex Bookstore Inc.
JIM V. LOPEZ. (2004). THE LAW ON ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION:
PRIVATE JUSTICE IN THE PHILIPPINES, How To SOLVE LEGAL
DISPUTES WITHOUT A CouRTRooM TRIAL, 59 . REX Bookstore Inc.
p.h. collin. (2000). dictionary of law. peter collin publishing ltd.
P.H. Collin. (2000). Dictionary of Law. Peter Collin Publishing Ltd.
ROGELIO E. SUBONG. (n.d.). Bringing Justice Closer to the People.
SUBONG, R. E. (n.d.). Bringing Justice Closer to the People.
Tan, Bayani K. and Ma. Gracia M. Pulido (1981) ’Katarungang Pambarangay Law:
Its Goals, Processes and Impact on the Right Against Self-Incrimination’,
Philippine Law Journal 56: 425-38.
JURISPRUDENCE
Uy vs. Contreras, G.R. Nos. 111416-17. September 26, 1994.
Espino vs. Legarda, G.R. No. 149266, 485 SCRA 76 [2006]
ESTELA L. BERBA vs. JOSEPHINE PABLO and THE HEIRS OF CARLOS
PALANCA, G.R. No. 160032. November 11, 2005

Harold vs. Aliba, G.R. No. 130864. October 2, 2007
Zamora vs. Heirs of Carmen Izquierdo, G.R. No. 146195. November 18, 2004
(Pang-et vs. Manacnes, , 2007)
Home Bankers Savings and Trust Company vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No.
115412. November 19, 1999
Vidal vs. Escueta, G.R. No. 156228. December 10, 2003
Bonifacio Law Office vs. Bellosillo, A.M. No. MTJ-00-1308. December 16, 2002
LAWS
1991, A. A. (October 10, 1991). Republic Act No. 7160 Section 41(b); Section 43
Amended by RA 8553.
Republic Act No. 7160, AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT
CODE OF 1991. (n.d.).
ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 14-93. (n.d.).
WEBSITE OR ONLINE REFERENCES
http://opinion.inquirer.net/57591/hustisyeah-to-decongest-the-
judiciary#ixzz5Ng9jr5nz. (n.d.).
http://werdan88.blogspot.com/2009/10/critical-analysis-of-justice-system-
in.html. (n.d.).
http://www.accessfacility.org/sites/default/files/Katarungang%20Pambarang
ay%20Handbook_0.pdf. (n.d.).
http://www.accessfacility.org/sites/default/files/Katarungang%20Pambarang
ay%20Handbook_0.pdf. (n.d.).
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/00000166208888cc20f0468300360
0fb002c009e/t/?o=False. (n.d.).
http://www.garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Feb2018/12.pdf. (n.d.).
http://www.gov.ph/catjlocalgov/default.asp . (n.d.).
http://www.ls.pnp.gov.ph/July%202012%20Legal%20Advisories.pdf. (n.d.).
http://zabalketa.org/wp-
content/uploads/2016/02/Guide_to_katarungang_2012.pdf. (n.d.).
https://asiafoundation.org/2012/04/11/taking-a-hard-look-at-formal-and-
informal-justice-systems-in-the-philippines/. (n.d.).
https://dirp3.pids.gov.ph/ris/taps/tapspp9926.pdf. (n.d.).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_court. (n.d.).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_Solomon_Islands. (n.d.).
https://wikivividly.com/wiki/Katarungang_Pambarangay. (n.d.).
https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/30.%20Indigenous%20Justice%20Mecha
nisms%20in%20some%20Overseas%20Countries%3A%20Models%20and
%20Comparisons/pa. (n.d.).
https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/30.%20Indigenous%20Justice%20Mecha
nisms%20in%20some%20Overseas%20Countries%3A%20Models%20and
%20Comparisons/pa. (n.d.).
https://www.dayananconsulting.com/understanding-philippines-local-
government-unit-system-foreign-businesses-operators/. (n.d.).
https://www.manilatimes.net/all-disputes-generally-subject-of-barangay-
conciliation/155694/. (n.d.).
https://www.niu.edu/cseas/_pdf/lesson-plans/fulbright-hays/philippine-
political-structure.pdf. (n.d.).
Dear Respondent,
One of my requirements as a student of Bulacan State University College of Law is to

complete a thesis entitled,” A Critical Analysis on the effectiveness of the Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law under Republic Act R.A 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code
of 1991 in Barangay Taboc in the decongestion of cases of the Municipal Trial Court of Angat,
Bulacan.. That being said, I would like to request you to answer this short questionnaire for the
information and answers you will indicate are very much relevant. Your responses will be kept
confidential.
Thankfully yours,
Princess Ruth B. Adriano
Check your responses.
Gender ○ Male ○ Female
Age ○ 18-24 years old

○ 25-34 years old
○ 35-44 years old
○ 45-54 years old
○ 55-64 years old
Marital Status ○ Single ○ Married ○ Separated ○ Widowed
Employment ○ Private Practitioner
○ Government Employee
○ Member of the Judiciary
○ Out of work and looking for work
○ Out of work but not currently looking for work
○ Retired
Education ○ University Graduate

○ College Undergraduate
○ High School Graduate
○ High School Undergraduate
○ Elementary Level
KATANUNGAN TUGON
( PARA SA MGA TAGAPAGPATUPAD)
1. Narinig mo na ba ang patungkol sa “Katarungang OO HINDI
Pambarangay Law?”
2. Ikaw ba ay naging bahagi na ng pagpapatupad nito? OO HINDI
3. Bilang isang tagapagpatupad, masasabi mo bang ito ay OO HINDI

kapaki - pakinabang?
4. Ikaw ba ang minsan ng naging bahagi ng mga trainings/ OO HINDI

seminars na may kinalaman sa pagpapalawig ng batas na ito?
5. Sa iyong palagay, nangangailangan pa ba ng mga trainings/ OO HINDI

seminars ang mga tagapagpatupad nito?
6. Masasabi mo bang maayos ang pagpapatupad nito? OO HINDI
7. May mga pagkakataon ba na hindi nareresolba ang mga kaso OO HINDI

na idinudulog sa barangay?
8. Kung Oo, alin sa mga sumusunod ang posibleng mga dahilan?

(maaaring pumili ng higit sa isa)
a. Kakulangan ng kaalaman ng ukol sa batas na ito;
b. Hindi pagdalo ng mga mga partido sa itinakdang

paghaharap;
c. Kawalan ng interes ng mga partido;
d. Kagustuhan ng magkabilang panig na huwag na

lamang magkasundo;
e. Hindi maipaliwanag na dahilan ng pagpapaliban sa

itinakdang paghaharap;
f. Kawalan ng kumpiyansa sa sarili ng ilang miyembro

ng Lupon;
g. Kawalan ng pormal na edukasyon ng ilang miyembro

ng Lupon;
h. Hindi pagkakasundo – sundo ng mga ideya ng mga

miyembro ng Lupon;
9. Masasabi mo bang ito ay isang mabisang paraan upang OO HINDI

makatulong sa pagpapaluwag ng bilang ng mga kaso sa
Municipal Trial Court?
10. Ikaw ba ay sumasang ayon na ang batas na ito ay ginawa OO HINDI

upang malutas ang hindi pangkaraniwang pagsikip ng mga
“court dockets” at mapanatili ang maayos na pagsasamahan
ng mga miyembro ng komunidad?
KATANUNGAN TUGON
(PARA SA MGA PARTIDO)
1. Narinig mo na ba ang patungkol sa “Katarungang OO HINDI
Pambarangay Law?”
2. Ikaw ba ay minsan nang humingi ng tulong sa batas OO HINDI
na ito?
3. Masasabi mo bang naresolba ng batas na ito ang OO HINDI
iyong suliranin?
4. Masasabi mo bang epektibo ang paraan ng OO HINDI
pagpapatupad nito?
5. Nangangailangan pa ba ng dagdag na kaalaman OO HINDI
ukol sa pagpapatupad nito?
ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

(CURRICULUM VITAE)

Sample Format of Thesis Manuscript

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sample Format of Thesis Manuscript

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

B U L AC A N S T AT E U N I V E R S I T Y - C O L L E G E O F L AW 1

PROPOSED THESIS TITLE

A Thesis Proposal Presented to the College of Law

Bulacan State University

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

Juris Doctor (with Thesis Program)

Certification of English Critic

English Editing Certification Form

This is to certify that I have edited this thesis/dissertation manuscript entitled:

TITLE PAGE …………………………………………………………………………. …i

1. Similar Courts in Other Countries .... ……………………………………28

II.Review of Related Study ........................................................................................31

AN ACT PROVIDING FOR A LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE OF 1991….......34

CASES UNDER KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY ...........................................42

I. Research Design ........................................................................................... 69

II. Research Methodology ............................................................................... 70

Katarungang Pambarangay (KP) or Barangay Justice System (BJS) is an alternative,

community-based mechanism for dispute resolution of conflicts between

members of the same community.1

The Barangay Justice System provides a venue for disputing parties to

as intermediaries, facilitating the discussion of possible solutions.

members (committee of respected community members).

The Barangay has a Justice System or Katarungang Pambarangay. The

barangay captain heads a committee called the “Lupon Tagapamayapa” (Justice

can avoid going to court.2

community. The account of Fr. Juan de Plascencia on the Customs of the

Tagalog3 were most enlightening:

“Investigations made and sentences passed by the dato must

take place in the presence of those of his barangay. If any of the

litigants felt himself aggrieved, an arbiter was unanimously named

from another village or barangay, whether he were a dato or not;

men, who were said to give true judgment according to their

customs. If the controversy lay between two chiefs, when they

wished to avoid war, they also convoked judges to act as arbiters;

they did the same if the disputants belonged to two different

barangays. In this ceremony they always had to drink, the plaintiff

inviting the others.”

This system of amicably settling disputes continued during the Spanish

authority as it was the primary duty of gobernadorcillos (municipal magistrates)

Chinese mestizos and Chinese.4

Regime with the imposition of American justice system, which is adversarial in

The first abstract conception of the Katarungang Pambarangay Law started

idea of settling disputes through “neighbourhood paralegal committee.” The

created a presidential commission tasked with a duty of studying the feasibility of

instituting a system of settling disputes among the members in the barangay

without going to courts.

institutionalized Katarungang Pambarangay. It was promulgated by then

organized, established and institutionalized a formal system of amicable

settlement of disputes at the barangay level.

In the spirit of reviving Filipino tradition of peacefully settling disputes

justice system under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law or PD 1508. KPL is an

referral of such cases to the court.5 Under PD 1508, a Lupong Tagapamayapa,

resolve disputes and settle complaints within the community.

tradition in the Philippines and is at the root of a Filipino culture.

Katarungang Pambarangay Law was incorporated as part of the codified laws on

The Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law under R. A. 7160, otherwise

which repealed P. D. 1508, introduced substantial changes not only in the

to be observed in the settlement of disputes within the authority of the Lupon.6

the supervision of the local government units.7

of dispute resolution”. The conciliatory character of BJS is much more attuned to

the Filipino culture of smoothing interpersonal and community relationship as

which is more “complicated” in nature.8 Moreover, BJS offers a more affordable

access to justice for our poor countrymen.

from abuse, exploitation, and violence as provided for in RA 7610 9 , RA