DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND CRISIS INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

INTRODUCTION
Restorative justice is an approach to justice in which the response to a crime is to organize
a meeting between the victim and the offender, sometimes with representatives of the wider
community. The goal is for them to share their experience of what happened, to discuss who was
harmed by the crime and how, and to create a consensus for what the offender can do to repair
the harm from the offense. This may include a payment of money given from the offender to the
victim, apologies and other amends, and other actions to compensate those affected and to
prevent the offender from causing future harm.
Restorative justice is a new movement in the fields of victimology and criminology.
Acknowledging that crime causes injury to people and communities, it insists that justice repair
those injuries and that the parties be permitted to participate in that process.
Comparatively, Restorative is a valued-based approach focused on determining harm
resulting from crime, what needs to be done to repair the harm, and who is responsible for
repairing the harm while Retributive is an approach focused on determining what law was broken,
who broke it, and how they should be punished.
Restorative view crime as an act against another person and the community and the
control lies in the community where the community facilitates the restorative process while
Retributive view crime as an act against the State and a violation of law. The control lies in the
justice system and the community becomes a sideline, represented by the State.
Restorative justice views crime as an accountability by both individual and the society and
punishment is not an effective means of changing behavior because it disrupts community
harmony and good relationship. Retributive justice views crime as an individual act and individual
responsibility and the offender should be punished in order to deter crime and change behavior.
On the other hand, Transformative justice is a general philosophical strategy for
responding to conflicts. It takes the principles and practices of restorative justice beyond the
criminal justice system. It applies to areas such as environmental law, corporate law, labor
management relations, consumer bankruptcy and debt, and family law. Transformative justice
uses a system approach, seeking to see problems, as not only the beginning of the crime but also
the causes of crime, and tries to treat an offense as a transformative relational and educational
opportunity for victims, offenders and all other members of the affected community. In theory, a
transformative justice model can apply even between peoples with no prior contact.
It can be seen as a general philosophical strategy for responding to conflicts akin to
peacemaking. Transformative justice is concerned with root causes and comprehensive
outcomes. It is akin to healing justice more than other alternatives to imprisonment.
The analogy is that Restorative Justice are at par with the concept of alternative dispute
resolution and amicable settlement. In this premise, the dispute resolution system under provides
the same perspective - the opportunity of providing freedom of the parties to decide at their own
expense while resolving the dispute. In addition, the use of ADR is an efficient tool and an
alternative procedure for the resolution of appropriate cases while enlisting the active private
sector participation in the settlement of disputes.
Another important milestone in the development of restorative justice is the system of
amicably settling disputes at the barangay level. The system is defined under the P.D. 1508
"Amicable Settlement Act" which provides the purpose of perpetuation and official recognition of
the time-honored tradition of amicably settling disputes among family and barangay members. at
the barangay level without judicial resources that would promote the speedy administration of
justice and implement the constitutional mandate to preserve and develop Filipino culture and to
strengthen the family as a basic social institution.

PART 1
DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM AND AMICABLE SETTLEMENT

Preliminaries
Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004 came into law for the purpose of promulgating
the prescribe procedures and guidelines for its implementation along with the policy of the state
to promote party autonomy in the resolution of disputes or the freedom of the parties to make their
own arrangements to resolve their disputes; to encourage and actively promote the use of
Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR") as an important means to achieve speedy and impartial
justice and to declog court dockets; to provide means for the use of ADR as an efficient tool and
an alternative procedure for the resolution of appropriate cases; and to enlist active private sector
participation in the settlement of disputes through ADR.
Applying the principles governing alternative dispute resolution will provide the opportunity
for the parties involved in to settle the issue in their own expense with the support of the local
community, authorities of the law and responsible social organizations with the aim of restoring
interpersonal relations thereby contributory to the public safety and promotion of peace in general.
Amicable settlement on the other hand, was formally institutionalized in order to help
relieve the courts of such docket congestion and thereby enhance the quality of justice dispensed
by them. In this premise, the context of restorative justice has served to reference the objective
of amicably settling disputes at the elementary level within the Barangay Justice system, primarily
with the objective of restoring personal relations and initiate effort from those that are mainly
affected.

The Concept of Conflict

A conflict is a struggle between people. The struggle may be physical, or between
conflicting ideas. The word comes from Latin "conflingere" means to come together for a battle.
Conflicts can either be within one person, or they can involve several people or groups.
 Conflict is a natural disagreement arising between two or more people. It exists when they
have incompatible goals and one or more believe that the behavior of the other prevents them
from their own goal achievement.

CONFLICT THEORIES
Conflict theories are perspectives in sociology and social psychology that emphasize a materialist
interpretation of history, dialectical method of analysis, a critical stance toward existing social
arrangements, and political program of revolution or, at least, reform. Conflict theories draw
attention to power differentials, such as class conflict, and generally contrast historically dominant
ideologies. It is therefore a macro-level analysis of society.
Karl Marx is the father of the social conflict theory, which is a component of the four major
paradigms of sociology (Functionalism, Conflict theory, Symbolic Interaction and Feminists
Perspective). Certain conflict theories set out to highlight the ideological aspects inherent in
traditional thought. While many of these perspectives hold parallels, conflict theory does not refer
to a unified school of thought, and should not be confused with, for instance, peace and conflict
studies, or any other specific theory of social conflict.
TYPES
Conflict theory is most commonly associated with Marxism, but as a reaction to
functionalism and the positivist method, it may also be associated with a number of other
perspectives, including:

•Critical theory: To unmask the ideology falsely justifying some form of social or economic
oppression—to reveal it as ideology—and, in so doing, to contribute to the task of ending
that oppression.

•Feminist theory: An approach that recognizes women's political, social, and economic
equality to men.

•Postmodern theory: An approach that is critical of modernism, with a mistrust of grand

theories and ideologies.

•Post-structural theory: Philosophical and literary forms of theory that both build upon and
reject ideas established by structuralism.

•Postcolonial theory: Is a body of thought primarily concerned with accounting for the
political, aesthetic, economic, historical, and social impact of European colonial rule
around the world in the 18th through the 20th century.

•Queer theory: A growing body of research findings. that challenges the heterosexual bias
in Western society.

•World systems theory

•Race-Conflict Approach: A point of view that focuses on inequality and conflict between
people of different racial and ethnic categories.
 MODERN APPROACH ON CONFLICT
Charles Wright Mills (1916-1962) an American sociologist, and a professor of sociology at
Columbia University from 1946 until his death in 1962. Mills was published widely in popular and
intellectual journals, and is remembered for several books such as The Power Elite, which
introduced that term and describes the relationships and class alliances among the US political,
military, and economic elites; White Collar: The American Middle Classes, on the American
middle class; and The Sociological Imagination, which presents a model of analysis for the
interdependence of subjective experiences within a person's biography, the general social
structure, and historical development.
Societies are defined by inequality that produces conflict, rather than which produces
order and consensus. This conflict based on inequality can only be overcome through a
fundamental transformation of the existing relations in the society and is productive of new social
relations.
The disadvantaged have structural interests that run counter to the status quo, which,
once they are assumed, will lead to social change. Thus, they are viewed as agents of change
rather than objects one should feel sympathy for.
Human potential (e.g., capacity for creativity) is suppressed by conditions of exploitation
and oppression, which are necessary in any society with an unequal division of labor. These and
other qualities do not necessarily have to be stunted due to the requirements of the so-called
"civilizing process," or "functional necessity": creativity is actually an engine for economic
development and change.

Concept of Conflict Resolution

Conflict resolution is conceptualized as the methods and processes involved in facilitating
the peaceful ending of conflict and retribution. The term conflict resolution may also be used
interchangeably with dispute resolution, where arbitration and litigation processes are critically
involved. The concept of conflict resolution can be thought to encompass the use of nonviolent
resistance measures by conflicted parties in an attempt to promote effective resolution.
Committed group members attempt to resolve group conflicts by actively communicating
information about their conflicting motives or ideologies to the rest of group (e.g., intentions;
reasons for holding certain beliefs) and by engaging in collective negotiation. Dimensions of
resolution typically parallel the dimensions of conflict in the way the conflict is processed.
Cognitive resolution is the way disputants understand and view the conflict, with beliefs,
perspectives, understandings and attitudes. Emotional resolution is in the way disputants feel
about a conflict, the emotional energy. Behavioral resolution is reflective of how the disputants
act, their behavior. Ultimately a wide range of methods and procedures for addressing conflict
exist, including negotiation, mediation, mediation-arbitration, diplomacy, and creative
peacebuilding.
Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann developed five conflict resolution strategies that
people use to handle conflict, including avoiding, defeating, compromising, accommodating, and
collaborating.
 This assumes that people choose how cooperative and how assertive to be in a conflict.
It suggests that everyone has preferred ways of responding to conflict, but most of us use all
methods under various circumstances.

CONFLICT RESOLUTION STRATEGIES

Conflict Resolution Strategy #1: Avoiding

Avoiding is when people just ignore or withdraw from the conflict. They choose this method
when the discomfort of confrontation exceeds the potential reward of resolution of the
conflict.
While this might seem easy to accommodate for the facilitator, people aren't really
contributing anything of value to the conversation and may be withholding worthwhile
ideas. When conflict is avoided, nothing is resolved.

Conflict Resolution Strategy #2: Competing

Competing is used by people who go into a conflict planning to win. They're assertive and
not cooperative.
This method is characterized by the assumption that one side wins and everyone else
loses. It doesn't allow room for diverse perspectives into a well-informed total picture.
Competing might work in sports or war, but it's rarely a good strategy for group problem
solving.

Conflict Resolution Strategy #3: Accommodating

Accommodating is a strategy where one party gives in to the wishes or demands of
another. They're being cooperative but not assertive.
This may appear to be a gracious way to give in when one figures out she/he has been
wrong about an argument. It's less helpful when one party accommodates another merely
to preserve harmony or to avoid disruption.
Like avoidance, it can result in unresolved issues. Too much accommodation can result
in groups where the most assertive parties commandeer the process and take control of
most conversations.

Conflict Resolution Strategy #4: Collaborating

Collaborating is the method used when people are both assertive and cooperative. A
group may learn to allow each participant to make a contribution with the possibility of co-
 creating a shared solution that everyone can support. A great way to collaborate and
overcome conflict is to reach out and touch them.

Conflict Resolution Strategy #5: Compromising

Another strategy is compromising, where participants are partially assertive and
cooperative.
The concept is that everyone gives up a little bit of what they want, and no one gets
everything they want. The perception of the best outcome when working by compromise
is that which "splits the difference."
Compromise is perceived as being fair, even if no one is particularly happy with the final
outcome.

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEM IN THE PHILIPPINES

(Republic Act No. 9285)

Policy of the State

The following statements provides the Policy of the State as reference for the sustenance
of social justice and promotion of peace while making it at the early stage of resolution.

✓ To promote party autonomy in the resolution of disputes or the freedom of the parties
to make their own arrangements to resolve their disputes;

✓ To encourage and actively promote the use of Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR")
as an important means to achieve speedy and impartial justice and to declog court
dockets;

✓ To provide means for the use of ADR as an efficient tool and an alternative procedure
for the resolution of appropriate cases; an

✓To enlist active private sector participation in the settlement of disputes through ADR.

Exception to the Application of the ADR Act

The provisions of the ADR Act shall not apply to the resolution or settlement of the following:
✓ labor disputes covered by Presidential Decree No. 442, otherwise known as the "Labor
Code of the Philippines, as amended", and its Implementing Rules and Regulations;
✓ the civil status of persons;
✓ the validity of marriage;
✓ any ground for legal separation;
✓ the jurisdiction of courts;
 ✓ future legitime;
✓ criminal liability;
✓ those disputes which by law cannot be compromised; and
✓ disputes referred to court-annexed mediation

Liability of ADR Providers/Practitioners

The ADR providers/practitioners shall have the same civil liability for acts done in the
performance of their official duties as that of public officers, upon a clear showing of bad faith,
malice or gross negligence.