ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO.

14-93

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and which repealed P. D. 1508, introduced substantial changes not only in the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Katarungang Pambarangay Law [formerly P. D. 1508, repealed and now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, partnerships 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 of 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 of
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 cralaw

[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) [Secs. 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.

Manila, Philippines; July 15, 1993.

[Sgd.] ANDRES R. NARVASA

Chief Justice

LAWYERS: KEEP OUT (The Katarungang Pambarangay Law)

By Siesta-friendly

What do you call a law prohibiting lawyers from participating in a justice system? Promising?

Unfortunately, we do not have statistics on how effective and successful the informal justice
system known as the “Katarungang Pambarangay” has been. But the mere fact that lawyers
are barred from the proceedings should be success enough.

Anyway, should you have any problem against someone, it is crucial to know the rules on the
Katarungang Pambarangay, as you will read below.

General Rule

The general rule is that the Lupon Tagapamayapa [1] (Committee for Peace) 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”. [2] So, provided they do not fall under
the exceptions, all disputes must first be submitted for possible conciliation at the barangay
level, before any court or other government body can take jurisdiction.

Exceptions[3]

Naturally, there are cases that are best handled by the courts, the Office of the Ombudsman,
the National Labor Relations Commission, the Securities and Exchange Commission, etc. So
we have exceptions to the general rule above, which are:

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, partnerships 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 1 year or a fine of over 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;
b. Petitions for habeas corpus by a person illegally deprived of his rightful custody over another
or a person illegally deprived of 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) [Secs. 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 [Sanchez vs. Tupaz, 158 SCRA 459];
13. Where the dispute involves members of the same indigenous
cultural community, such dispute 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 [Sec. 412 [c], R.A. 7160]
A court in which non-criminal cases not falling within the authority of the Lupon are filed, at
any time before trial, may motu proprio refer the case to the Lupon concerned for amicable
settlement. [Sec. 408 [g], 2nd par.]

The courts are strict about these rules. 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 (1) there has been a
confrontation between the parties before the Punong Barangay or the Pangkat, and that (2a)
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 (2b) the
settlement has been repudiated by the parties thereto. [4]

Cases filed in court without first going through barangay conciliation when required “may be
dismissed upon motion of defendant/s … for failure to state a cause of action or
prematurity”.[5]

Venue[6]

So exactly with which Lupon should one file a complaint?

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 (Lupon Chairman); otherwise, they are deemed waived. Any legal question which
may confront the punong barangay in resolving objections to venue may be submitted to the
Secretary of Justice, or his duly designated representative, whose ruling shall be binding.

Procedure[7]

Mediation by the Punong Barangay / Lupon Chairman

1. Upon payment of the appropriate filing fee (not less than P5.00 nor more
than P20.00)[8], any individual who has a cause of action against another may
complain, orally or in writing, to the Punong Barangay.
2. Upon receipt of the complaint, the Punong Barangay 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 not later than 5 days from date
thereof[9] for mediation of their conflicting interests.
3. The respondent shall answer the complaint, orally or in writing, by denying
specifically the material averments of the complaint and/or alleging any lawful
defense. He may also interpose a counterclaim against complainant, a cross-claim
against a co-respondent or a third-party complaint against one not yet a party to the
proceedings.[10]
4. Upon successful conclusion of his mediation effort, the Punong Barangay
shall reduce to writing in a language or dialect known to the parties the terms of the
settlement agreed upon by them, have them sign the same, and attest to its due
execution.[11]
 5. If the Punong Barangay fails in his mediation efforts within 15 days from the
first meeting of the parties before him, or where the respondent fails to appear at
the mediation proceeding before the Punong Barangay [12], he shall set a date for
the constitution of the Pangkat Tagapagkasundo [13] (Panel for Conciliation).
Conciliation by the Pangkat Tagapagkasundo

6. The Pangkat shall convene not later than 3 days from its constitution, on the
day and hour set by the Punong Barangay, to hear both parties and their witnesses,
simplify issues, and explore all possibilities for amicable settlement. The Pangkat
may also issue summons for the personal appearance of parties and witnesses.
If a party moves to disqualify any member of the Pangkat by reason of relationship, bias,
interest, or any other similar grounds, 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 vacancy shall be filled by drawing lots [See Sec. 404, R.A. 7160].

7. Respondent's refusal or willful failure to appear without justifiable reason

before the Pangkat, as determined by the latter after notice and hearing, shall be a
sufficient basis for the issuance of a certification for filing complainant's cause of
action in court or with the proper government agency or office.[14]
8. The Pangkat shall arrive at a settlement or resolution of the dispute within
15 days from the day it convenes. This period shall, at the Pangkat’s discretion, be
extendible for another period which shall not exceed 15 days, except in clearly
meritorious cases.
Informal but Orderly Proceedings[15]

The Punong Barangay and the Pangkat shall proceed to hear the matter in dispute in an
informal but orderly manner, without regard to technical rules of evidence, and as is best
calculated to effect a fair settlement of the dispute and bring about a harmonious
relationship of the parties.

Proceedings before the Punong Barangay shall be recorded by the Lupon Secretary while
those before the Pangkat shall be recorded by the Pangkat Secretary. The record shall note
the date and time of hearing, appearance of parties, names of witnesses and substance of
their testimonies, objections and resolutions, and such other matters as will be helpful to a
full understanding of the case.

Public Proceedings[16]

All proceedings for settlement shall be public and informal but the Punong Barangay or the
Pangkat chairman, as the case may be, may motu proprio or upon request of a party, exclude
the public from the proceedings in the interest of privacy, decency, or public morals.

Personal Appearance; No Lawyers[17]

In all 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. Total ban. Sweet.

Sanctions for Failure to Appear[18]

In case a party fails to appear for mediation, the Punong Barangay / Pangkat Chairman shall
set a date for the absent party/ies to appear before him to explain the reason for the failure
to appear.

If the Punong Barangay / Pangkat Chairman finds after hearing that the failure or refusal of
the complainant to appear is without justifiable reason, he shall (1) dismiss the complaint;
(2) direct the issuance of and attest to the certification to bar the filing of the action in court
or any government office; and (3) apply with the local trial court for punishment of the
recalcitrant party as for indirect contempt of court.

In case of similar willful failure or refusal of the respondent to appear for mediation before
the Punong Barangay / Pangkat Chairman (as may be applicable), the latter shall: (1) dismiss
the respondent's counterclaim; (2) direct the issuance of and attest to the certification (i) to
bar the filing of respondent's counterclaim in court/government office, and if already under
conciliation, (ii) to file complainant's action in court/government office; (3) apply with the
local trial court for punishment of the recalcitrant party as for indirect contempt of court;
and (4) if still under mediation, the Punong Barangay shall set a date for the parties to
appear before him for the constitution of the Pangkat.

The Punong Barangay shall apply, in similar manner, for the punishment of a recalcitrant
witness who willfully fails or refuses to appear, as for indirect contempt of court.

Suspension of Prescriptive Period

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 certificate of repudiation or of the certification to file action issued by
the Lupon or Pangkat Secretary. Such interruption, however, shall not exceed 60 days from
said filing of the complaint.

Repudiation of Settlement[19]

Any party to the dispute may, within 10 days from the date of the settlement, repudiate the
same by filing with the Punong Barangay 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 in court or any
government office. Failure to repudiate the settlement within the aforesaid time limit shall
be deemed a waiver of the right to challenge on said grounds.

Settlement as Final Judgment[20]

The amicable settlement and arbitration award shall have the force and effect of a final
judgment of a court upon the expiration of 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. Except that in cases where the court motu proprioreferred a
non-criminal case to the Lupon which is not within the latter’s jurisdiction, the compromise
settlement agreed upon shall first be submitted to the court and upon approval thereof, have
the force and effect of a judgment of said court.

Execution
The amicable settlement or arbitration award may be enforced by execution by the Lupon
within 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. [21]

The secretary of the Lupon shall transmit the settlement or the arbitration award to the
appropriate city or municipal court within 5 days from the date of the award or from the
lapse of the 10-day period repudiating the settlement and shall furnish copies thereof to
each of the parties to the settlement and the Punong Barangay. [22]

The Katarungan Pambarangay law is embodied in the Local Government Code and thus
comes part of the government’s hopes for decentralization and local government
empowerment and the aim of providing accessible and non-adversarial dispute resolution.
And in the pursuit of these hopes and aims, lawyers are deemed an obstruction.

[1] SEC. 399, R.A. 7160. Lupong Tagapamayapa. –

(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.
xxx
(f) In barangays where majority of the inhabitants are members of indigenous cultural communities,
local systems of es through their councils of datus or elders shall be recognized without prejudice to
the applicable provisions of this Code.

[2] Sec. 408, ibid.

[3] Par. I, Administrative Circular No. 14-93, “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]”, July 15, 1993.

[4] Sec. 412, R.A. 7160

[5] Par. IV, Administrative Circular No. 14-93.
[6] Sec. 409, RA 7160.
[7] Sec. 410, ibid.
[8] Rule VI, Sec. 4, Katarungang Pambarangay Circular No. 1, “Katarungang Pambarangay Rules and
Forms”, July 21, 1992
[9] Rule III, Sec. 1 b (1), ibid.
[10] Rule VI, Sec.5, ibid.
[11] Rule III, Sec. 1 b (4), ibid.
[12] Rule VI, Sec.8 a, 3rd par., ibid.
[13] Sec. 404, R.A. 7160. 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.

The Lupon secretary shall issue certified true copies of any public record in his custody that is not by
law otherwise declared confidential.

[14] Rule VI, Sec.8 a, 3rd par., Katarungang Pambarangay Circular No. 1.
[15] Rule VI, Sec.5, ibid.
[16] Sec. 414, ibid.
[17] Sec. 415, ibid.
[18] Rule VI, Sec. 8 b, 1, Katarungang Pambarangay Circular No. 1.
[19] Rule VI, Sec. 14, ibid.
[20] Sec. 416, R.A. 7160.
[21] Sec. 417, ibid.
[22] Sec. 419, ibid.