Social media networks have been our virtual friends and a replacement for real-life social interaction. We express our discontentment, happiness, disappointment, sadness and other forms of emotion through social media, hoping we can get some sense of validation and comfort from our friends. Our newsfeed is often filled with clamours from one of our friends. We laugh at random thoughts and musings, get annoyed by endless whining and complaints. We hate being confronted by statuses about an individual's perpetual problem when they know for a fact that social media networks cannot provide cyber counselling. On a different note, the social media has been instrumental to change. It has become purveyors of good news, but we should not also deny instances that we have been swayed by fake news all because they are worthy of sharing. Now even disputes that are supposed to be settled at barangay level may find its way to our newsfeed. We hear people asking for assistance despite the presence of barangay officials.
Is this really the norm these days? Are people not aware of the existence of barangay justice system? While there are Barangay officials who are fulfilling their duty to maintain peace and order in each barangay, there are officials who are not giving proper assistance to people filing cases despite numerous instances of follow-ups. Presidential Decree No. 1508 repealed by Republic Act 7160, is intended to establish a system where people can settle disputes at the barangay level. This system is known as Lupong Tagapayapa composed of the Barangay Chairman, who will act as the head of the Lupon. According to the law, "The Lupon shall exercise administrative supervision over the conciliation panels hereinafter provided for. It shall meet regularly once a month (1) to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas among its members and the public on matters relevant to the amicable settlement of disputes; and (2) to enable the various panels to share with one another their observation and experiences in effecting speedy resolution of disputes."
It is quite understandable that some people are more comfortable approaching city mayors, police authorities and the like as they do not know the subject matters that can be settled by barangay officials. Section 408 of Republic Act 7160 otherwise known as Local Government Code of 1991 states that "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.
We should also note that the barangay officials have no authority over the following disputes:
"1. involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or municipalities, except where such barangays adjoin each other; and
2. involving real property located in different municipalities."
Before we approach other city officials and authorities, the procedure for amicable settlement must also be taken into account. It is important to assess if the following has already been done by the Barangay Chairman:
"(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."
The Barangay Justice System will also be properly implemented if Lupon Chairman, members and secretary undergo training on the classification of cases, procedures of the settlement, administrative requirements of Katarungang Pambarangay (KP) Law, Mediation/Conciliation/Arbitration procedures and more. This way, people will not be too inclined in using other avenues such as social media because of losing faith in the Barangay Justice System.
