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 Presidential Decree No. 1508 repealed by Republic Act 7160, is intended to establish a system where people can settle disputes at the barangay level.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. 

If you and your siblings have inherited a land from your parents and all of you are named as co-owners, there will come a time when one of you will decide to divide the property as a way of claiming the portion you co-owned.

In this case, siblings must know the provisions of  partitioning the property. Problems arise due to an undivided property. While this can be a classic example of sibling rivalry, such conflict may end up in court if not settled. Article 494 to 501 of the Civil Code of the Philippines provides the provision with regard to the partition of the property you co-owned.

Article 494-501 of the Civil Code of the Philippines

Art. 494. No co-owner shall be obliged to remain in the co-ownership. Each co-owner may demand at any time the partition of the thing owned in common, insofar as his share is concerned.

Nevertheless, an agreement to keep the thing undivided for a certain period of time, not exceeding ten years, shall be valid. This term may be extended by a new agreement.

A donor or testator may prohibit partition for a period which shall not exceed twenty years.

Neither shall there be any partition when it is prohibited by law.

No prescription shall run in favor of a co-owner or co-heir against his co-owners or co-heirs so long as he expressly or impliedly recognizes the co-ownership. (400a)

Art. 495. Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding article, the co-owners cannot demand a physical division of the thing owned in common, when to do so would render it unserviceable for the use for which it is intended. But the co-ownership may be terminated in accordance with Article 498. (401a)

Art. 496. Partition may be made by agreement between the parties or by judicial proceedings. Partition shall be governed by the Rules of Court insofar as they are consistent with this Code. (402)

Art. 497. The creditors or assignees of the co-owners may take part in the division of the thing owned in common and object to its being effected without their concurrence. But they cannot impugn any partition already executed, unless there has been fraud, or in case it was made notwithstanding a formal opposition presented to prevent it, without prejudice to the right of the debtor or assignor to maintain its validity. (403)

Art. 498. Whenever the thing is essentially indivisible and the co-owners cannot agree that it be allotted to one of them who shall indemnify the others, it shall be sold and its proceeds distributed. (404)

Art. 499. The partition of a thing owned in common shall not prejudice third persons, who shall retain the rights of mortgage, servitude or any other real rights belonging to them before the division was made. Personal rights pertaining to third persons against the co-ownership shall also remain in force, notwithstanding the partition. (405)

Art. 500. Upon partition, there shall be a mutual accounting for benefits received and reimbursements for expenses made. Likewise, each co-owner shall pay for damages caused by reason of his negligence or fraud. (n)

Art. 501. Every co-owner shall, after partition, be liable for defects of title and quality of the portion assigned to each of the other co-owners.

If there's something strange, in your neighborhood.  Who ya gonna call? Ghostbusters! Kidding aside, you cannot turn a blind eye on neighbors crying for help especially if their life is at stake.

An blunt example would be an abusive husband beating his hapless spouse. The lights were already out and you could hear nothing but crickets serenading in deathly still night. Your eyelids were already heavy and about to fall into the oblivion of sleep. You were about to be caught by paralysis called sleep, when you heard a shout match. It was too disturbing to ignore. Satisfying your curious nature, you got up and checked where the noise came from.

It was from your neighbor. The couples were engaging in a bad-tempered argument. The wife was silenced as the husband started to throw a series of punches. You could see a glimpse of their squabble from a far. The wife was crying helplessly in dire need of immediate help. As a concerned neighbor, you immediately went to the 'barangay' officials in your village to ask for assistance only to be turned down. Your request fell on deaf ears because the officials told you that they were not in the position to intervene because the matter should be between the married couple only. However, it is the duty of 'barangay' officials to heed your request under Section 30 of Republic Act 9262.

SECTION 30. Duties of Barangay Officials and Law Enforcers. – Barangay officials and law enforcers shall have the following duties:

(a) respond immediately to a call for help or request for assistance or protection of the victim by entering the necessary whether or not a protection order has been issued and ensure the safety of the victim/s;

(b) confiscate any deadly weapon in the possession of the perpetrator or within plain view;

(c) transport or escort the victim/s to a safe place of their choice or to a clinic or hospital;

(d) assist the victim in removing personal belongs from the house;

(e) assist the barangay officials and other government officers and employees who respond to a call for help;

(f) ensure the enforcement of the Protection Orders issued by the Punong Barangay or the courts;

(g) arrest the suspected perpetrator wiithout a warrant when any of the acts of violence defined by this Act is occurring, or when he/she has personal knowledge that any act of abuse has just been committed, and there is imminent danger to the life or limb of the victim as defined in this Act; and

(h) immediately report the call for assessment or assistance of the DSWD, social Welfare Department of LGUs or accredited non-government organizations (NGOs).

Any barangay official or law enforcer who fails to report the incident shall be liable for a fine not exceeding Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00) or whenever applicable criminal, civil or administrative liability.