FACTS

Spouses Leonor and Rosa Badua allegedly own farm land from which they were
forcibly ejected through the decision of the Cordillera Bodong Administration,
with the case entitled David Quema v. Leonor Badua.

The background of this case reveals that David Quema owns the parcels of land
evidenced by Tax Declarations 4997 and 4998. The parcels of land were purchased
from Dr. Erotida Valera.

Twenty-two (22) years later, he was able to redeem the parcels of land through
payment of 10,000 to the vendor's heir, Jessie Macaraeg. Quema was prevented from
tilling the land by Rosa Badua. Prompted by such turn of events, David Quema filed
a case in the Baranggay Council but failed to have the dispute settled. A judge
advised Quema to file his case in the provincial courts. However, Quema did not,
and filed it in the tribal court of the Maeng Tribe.

Due to several warnings from the tribe, spouses Badua filed a petition for special
relief, with the following to be settled:

a. That the respondents be enjoined from enforcing the decision of the tribal
court in the pending case.
b. The respondents be prohibited from usurping judicial power.
c. That the legal personality of the Cordillera Bodong Administration be
clarified.

The Baduas also allege that they were denied due process (or hearing) and that the
tribal court has NO jurisdiction over the case, since neither they nor the
respondent are members of the Maeng tribe.

The respondents contend that the SC has no jurisdiction over the case since the
tribal court is NOT a part of the judicial system.

ISSUE:

Whether the tribal court has jurisdiction over the case.

HELD:

No. Tribal courts are not a part of the Philippine judicial system which consists
of the Supreme Court and the lower courts which have been established by law (Sec.
1, Art. VIII, 1987 Constitution). They do not possess judicial power. Like the
pangkats or conciliation panels created by P.D. No. 1508 in the barangays, they
are advisory and conciliatory bodies whose principal objective is to bring
together the parties to a dispute and persuade them to make peace, settle, and
compromise.

An amicable settlement, compromise, and arbitration award rendered by a pangkat,

if not seasonably repudiated, has the force and effect of a final judgment of a
court (Sec. 11, P.D. 1508), but it can be enforced only through the local city or
municipal court to which the secretary of the Lupon transmits the compromise
settlement or arbitration award upon expiration of the period to annul or
repudiate it (Sec. 14, P.D. 1508). Similarly, the decisions of a tribal court
based on compromise or arbitration, as provided in P.D. 1508, may be enforced or
set aside, in and through the regular courts today.