philja.judiciary.gov.phphilja.judiciary.gov.ph/files/journal/vol4issue11.pdf · attorney ismael g....

JJJJJAAAAAUDICIALUDICIALUDICIALUDICIALUDICIALOURNALOURNALOURNALOURNALOURNAL

PHILPHILPHILPHILPHIL

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

I. II. II. II. II. INTRNTRNTRNTRNTRODUCTIONODUCTIONODUCTIONODUCTIONODUCTION TTTTTOOOOO M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

II. SII. SII. SII. SII. SPEECHESPEECHESPEECHESPEECHESPEECHES

On the NaturOn the NaturOn the NaturOn the NaturOn the Nature ofe ofe ofe ofe of Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation MediationMediation, Mediation, Mediation, Mediation, Mediation, BaBaBaBaBayyyyyanihananihananihananihananihan and the and the and the and the and the

BarangBarangBarangBarangBarangaaaaay y y y y JJJJJustice Systemustice Systemustice Systemustice Systemustice System

Philippine Mediation CenterPhilippine Mediation CenterPhilippine Mediation CenterPhilippine Mediation CenterPhilippine Mediation Center

PPPPPotential ofotential ofotential ofotential ofotential of Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation MediationInterInterInterInterInternational Denational Denational Denational Denational Devvvvvelopmentselopmentselopmentselopmentselopments

ooooonnnnn Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation

Mediators as PMediators as PMediators as PMediators as PMediators as Peacemakeacemakeacemakeacemakeacemakersersersersers

PPPPPersonal Accounts ofersonal Accounts ofersonal Accounts ofersonal Accounts ofersonal Accounts of Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation

III. III. III. III. III. WWWWWRITERITERITERITERITE-----UPSUPSUPSUPSUPS

v

SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES

CHIEF JUSTICE

Hon. HILARIO G. DAVIDE, Jr.

ASSOCIATE JUSTICES

Hon. JOSUE N. BELLOSILLOHon. JOSE A.R. MELO

Hon. REYNATO S. PUNOHon. JOSE C. VITUG

Hon. SANTIAGO M. KAPUNANHon. VICENTE V. MENDOZA

Hon. ARTEMIO V. PANGANIBANHon. LEONARDO A. QUISUMBING

Hon. CONSUELO YÑARES SANTIAGOHon. SABINO R. DE LEON

Hon. ANGELINA SANDOVAL GUTIERREZHon. ANTONIO T. CARPIO

Hon. MA. ALICIA M. AUSTRIA MARTINEZHon. RENATO C. CORONA

COURT ADMINISTRATORHon. PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, Jr.

DEPUTY COURT ADMINISTRATORSHon. ZENAIDA N. ELEPAÑO

Hon. JOSE P. PEREZHon. CHRISTOPHER O. LOCK

CLERK OF COURT

Attorney LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

ASST. COURT ADMINISTRATORS

Attorney ANTONIO H. DUJUAAttorney ISMAEL G. KHAN, Jr.

(Chief, Public Information Office)Attorney CARLOS L. DE LEON

ASST. CLERK OF COURT

Attorney MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

DIVISION CLERKS OF COURT

Attorney VIRGINIA A. SORIANOAttorney TOMASITA M. DRIS

Attorney JULIETA Y. CARREON

vi

PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY

Board of Trustees

Hon. HILARIO G. DAVIDE Jr.Chief Justice

Chairman

Hon. JOSUE N. BELLOSILLOSenior Associate Justice, Supreme Court

Vice-Chairman

Members

Hon. ILUMINADA C. CORTESExecutive Judge, Presiding Judge,

Executive Officials

Hon. PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, Jr.Court Administrator

Hon. FRANCIS E. GARCHITORENAPresiding Justice, Sandiganbayan

Dean ROMULO BORJAExec. Vice-President, Philippine Association of Law

Schools

Hon. AMEURFINA A. MELENCIO HERRERAChancellor

Hon. CANCIO C. GARCIAPresiding Justice, Court of Appeals

Hon. MARINO M. DE LA CRUZ, Jr.President, Philippine Judges Association

Dean PACIFICO A. AGABINConstitutional Law

Hon. OSCAR M. HERRERA, Sr.Remedial Law

Professor ROMAN F. MABANTA, Jr.Commercial Law

Fr. RANHILIO C. AQUINOJurisprudence and Legal Philosophy

Head, Academic Office

Hon. PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, Jr.Court Management

ACA ANTONIO H. DUJUASpecial Areas of Concern

Hon. RICARDO C. PUNO, Sr.Civil Law

Hon. ROMEO J. CALLEJO, Sr.Criminal Law

Dr. PURIFICACION V. QUISUMBINGInternational and Human Rights Law

Hon. HILARION L. AQUINOEthics and Judicial Conduct

Professor MYRNA S. FELICIANOLegal Method and Research

Atty. IVAN JOHN E. UYCourt Technology

Judicial Reforms Groups

Hon. AMEURFINA A. MELENCIO HERRERAChair

Head, Administrative Office

Head, Finance Office

Hon. AMEURFINA A. MELENCIO HERRERAChancellor

Hon. ANTONIO M. MARTINEZVice-Chancellor

Hon. PRISCILA S. AGANAExecutive Secretary

Academic Council

Hon. AMEURFINA A. MELENCIO HERRERAPresiding Officer

Hon. BERNARDO T. PONFERRADAHead, Judicial Reforms Committee

MTCC, Br. 4, Baguio City

vii

Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio HerreraChancellor

Professor Sedfrey M. CandelariaEditor-in-Chief

Editorial Advisers

Dr. Pacifico A. Agabin, Constitutional LawJustice Ricardo C. Puno, Sr., Civil Law

Justice Oscar M. Herrera, Sr., Remedial LawJustice Romeo J. Callejo, Sr., Criminal Law

Professor Roman F. Mabanta, Jr., Commercial LawDr. Purificacion V. Quisumbing, International and Human Rights Law

Fr. Ranhilio C. Aquino, Jurisprudence and Legal PhilosophyJustice Hilarion L. Aquino, Ethics and Judicial Conduct

Justice Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., Court ManagementAssociate Dean Myrna S. Feliciano, Legal Method and Research

ACA Antonio H. Dujua, Special Areas of ConcernAttorney Ivan John E. Uy, Court Technology

Editorial Staff

Attorney Orlando B. CariñoAttorney Jack Andrew O. Miranda

Emmanuel C. IgnacioMelanie H. Perez

Armida M. SalazarMichael S. SantosQueency M. Sara

Blythe M. Lumague

THE PHILJTHE PHILJTHE PHILJTHE PHILJTHE PHILJA JUDICIAL JOURNA JUDICIAL JOURNA JUDICIAL JOURNA JUDICIAL JOURNA JUDICIAL JOURNALALALALAL

CONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTSCONTENTS

OFFICIALS OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES .............v

OFFICERS OF THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY .........................vi

FOREWORD

Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera (ret.) .....................xix


AN INVITATION TO MEDIATION

Philippine Mediation Center .......................................................1

THE MEDIATION PROJECT

Atty. Ma. Cristina CabreraMr. Jose Name, Jr. ............................................................................6

AMENDED GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF

MEDIATION/CONCILIATION PROCEEDINGS IN THE

PILOT AREAS OF MANDALUYONG CITY AND

VALENZUELA CITY ........................................................................29

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 21-2001RE: PARTICIPATION IN THE AMICABLE

SETTLEMENT WEEKS .....................................................................34

ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 24-2001RE: INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL PARTICIPANTS IN THE

AMICABLE SETTLEMENT WEEKS .................................................37

VOLUME 4 ISSUE NO. 11 January - March 2002


ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER NO. 01-10-5-SC-PHILJARE: VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS OF THE BOARD OF

TRUSTEES OF THE PHILJA ..........................................................39

CIRCULAR NO. 82-2001RE: DESIGNATION OF THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY

AS THE COMPONENT UNIT OF THE SUPREME COURT

FOR COURT-REFERRED, COURT-RELATED MEDIATION

CASES AND OTHER ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

MECHANISMS AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE

PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER (PMC) ................................42

II. SII. SII. SII. SII. SPEECHESPEECHESPEECHESPEECHESPEECHES

OOOOONNNNN THETHETHETHETHE N N N N NAAAAATURETURETURETURETURE OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

MEDIATION: A SPEEDY AND INEXPENSIVE

DISPENSATION OF JUSTICE

Dean Reynaldo L. Suarez ...........................................................47

THE FACILITATIVE NATURE OF MEDIATION

Judge Adriano R. Osorio ............................................................51

MEDIATION AND CONSENSUAL DEMOCRACY

President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo ........................................56

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION, B, B, B, B, BAAAAAYYYYYANIHANANIHANANIHANANIHANANIHAN

ANDANDANDANDAND THETHETHETHETHE B B B B BARANGAARANGAARANGAARANGAARANGAYYYYY J J J J JUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICE S S S S SYYYYYSTEMSTEMSTEMSTEMSTEM

MEDIATION: THE COURT’S PARTNER FOR JUSTICE

IN THE NEW MILLENNIUM

Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. ..........................................62


MEDIATION IN THE COURTS AND THE BARANGAY JUSTICE SYSTEM

Justice Antonio M. Martinez (ret.) ..........................................67

PPPPPHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION C C C C CENTERENTERENTERENTERENTER (PMC) (PMC) (PMC) (PMC) (PMC)

THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF MEDIATION

Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera (ret.) ...................82

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER

Dean Reynaldo L. Suarez ............................................................86

THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER:PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE

Dean Eduardo de los Angeles ....................................................89

BUILDING CAPABILITY FOR MEDIATION

Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera (ret.) .......................95

PPPPPOOOOOTENTIALTENTIALTENTIALTENTIALTENTIAL OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

THE FUTURE OF MEDIATION IN THE COUNTRY

Dean Eduardo de los Angeles ................................................101

THE FUTURE OF MEDIATION IN THE PHILIPPINES

IS NOW ASSURED

Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. .......................................111

THE GREAT PROMISE OF MEDIATION

Ms. Annabelle T. Abaya ............................................................116

IIIIINTERNNTERNNTERNNTERNNTERNAAAAATIONTIONTIONTIONTIONALALALALAL D D D D DEVELEVELEVELEVELEVELOPMENTSOPMENTSOPMENTSOPMENTSOPMENTS ONONONONON M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE USE OF MEDIATION



MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATTTTTORSORSORSORSORS ASASASASAS P P P P PEAEAEAEAEACEMAKERSCEMAKERSCEMAKERSCEMAKERSCEMAKERS

THE MEDIATOR’S MISSION


USAID AND THE PHILIPPINES’ NEW PEACEMAKERS

Mr. Joseph S. Ryan, Jr. ..............................................................137

PPPPPERSONERSONERSONERSONERSONALALALALAL A A A A ACCOUNTSCCOUNTSCCOUNTSCCOUNTSCCOUNTS OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

MEDIATION AND THE FAMILY COURT JUDGE

Judge Rosalina L. Pison ............................................................141

MEDIATION: A WONDER MEDICINE

Prosecutor Dominador D. Bornasal, Jr. ................................148

III. III. III. III. III. WWWWWRITERITERITERITERITE-----UPSUPSUPSUPSUPS

SC NEARS “ZERO BACKLOG” OF CASES

Public Information Office, Supreme Court .......................152

ARROYO LAUDS SUPREME COURT ON USE OF MEDIATION

Isabel C. De Leon, Manila Bulletin .......................................154

MEDIATION AS A TOOL

Opinion, Manila Standard ......................................................156

COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION

Larry Sipin, Manila Standard .................................................158

THE LADY NEEDS A FACELIFT

Jullie Yap Daza, Manila Standard ..........................................163

CHASING THE WIND: MEDIATION AS A WAY OF LIFE

Felipe B. Miranda, The Philippine Star ................................167


WHY SUE WHEN YOU CAN SETTLE?Maricar Jara-Puyod, Manila Standard .................................171

THE FILIPINO WAY OF SETTLING DISPUTES

Fred de la Rosa, The Manila Times .......................................175

MEDIATION OF CASES IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

Francis Lim, The Philippine Star ...........................................179



AN INVITATION TO MEDIATION

Philippine Mediation CenterI. WHAT IS MEDIATION? ...............................................................1II. ADVANTAGES OF MEDIATION ....................................................2III. CASES REFERABLE FOR MEDIATION .........................................2IV. WHEN CAN MEDIATION BE ORDERED? .....................................3V. SELECTION OF A MEDIATOR ......................................................3VI. CONFIDENTIALITY ......................................................................3VII. VOLUNTARY PROCESS .................................................................4VIII. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH COMPROMISE AGREEMENT ............4IX. MEDIATION FEE ..........................................................................4X. PAYMENT OF MEDIATION FEE ................................................5

THE MEDIATION PROJECT

Atty. Ma. Cristina CabreraMr. Jose Name, Jr.I. MEDIATION IN GENERAL ...........................................................7II. MEDIATION IN THE PHILIPPINES ...............................................8III. 1ST PILOT PROJECT ON COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION .........11IV. 2ND PILOT TESTING OF COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION .....12

II. RII. RII. RII. RII. RESOLESOLESOLESOLESOLUTIONSUTIONSUTIONSUTIONSUTIONS, O, O, O, O, ORDERSRDERSRDERSRDERSRDERS ANDANDANDANDAND C C C C CIRIRIRIRIRCULARSCULARSCULARSCULARSCULARS

AMENDED GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION

OF MEDIATION/CONCILIATION PROCEEDINGS

IN THE PILOT AREAS OF MANDALUYONG CITY AND

VALENZUELA CITY ........................................................................29

ADMINISTRATICE ORDER NO. 21-2001RE: PARTICIPATION IN THE AMICABLE

SETTLEMENT WEEKS ....................................................................34


ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER NO. 24-2001RE: INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL PARTICIPANTS IN THE

AMICABLE SETTLEMENT WEEKS .................................................37

ADMINISTRATIVE MATTER NO. 01-10-5-SC-PHILJARE: VARIOUS RESOLUTIONS OF THE

BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE PHILJA ......................................39

CIRCULAR NO. 82-2001RE: DESIGNATION OF THE PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY

AS THE COMPONENT UNIT OF THE SUPREME COURT

FOR COURT-REFERRED, COURT-RELATED MEDIATION

CASES AND OTHER ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

MECHANISMS AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE

PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER (PMC) ................................42

III. SIII. SIII. SIII. SIII. SPEECHESPEECHESPEECHESPEECHESPEECHES


MEDIATION: A SPEEDY AND INEXPENSIVE

DISPENSATION OF JUSTICE


THE FACILITATIVE NATURE OF MEDIATION

Judge Adriano R. Osorio ............................................................51

MEDIATION AND CONSENSUAL DEMOCRACY

President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo ........................................56


MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION, B, B, B, B, BAAAAAYYYYYANIHANANIHANANIHANANIHANANIHAN

ANDANDANDANDAND THETHETHETHETHE B B B B BARANGAARANGAARANGAARANGAARANGAYYYYY J J J J JUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICE S S S S SYYYYYSTEMSTEMSTEMSTEMSTEM

MEDIATION: THE COURT’S PARTNER FOR JUSTICE

IN THE NEW MILLENNIUM

Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. .........................................62

MEDIATION IN THE COURTS AND THE BARANGAY JUSTICE SYSTEM

Justice Antonio M. MartinezINTRODUCTION ....................................................................................67I. MEDIATION IN COURTS ..............................................................68II. THE BARANGAY JUSTICE SYSTEM ..............................................77CONCLUSION ........................................................................................80

PPPPPHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION C C C C CENTERENTERENTERENTERENTER (PMC) (PMC) (PMC) (PMC) (PMC)

THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF MEDIATION

Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera (ret.) ......................82

THE ESTABLISHEMENT OF THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER


THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER:PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE

Dean Eduardo de los AngelesI. THE PAST ..................................................................................89II. THE PRESENT ...............................................................................92III. THE FUTURE ................................................................................93

BUILDING CAPABILITY FOR MEDIATION

Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera (ret.) .......................95



THE FUTURE OF MEDIATION IN THE COUNTRY

Dean Eduardo de los AngelesI. THE PROBLEM ........................................................................102II. THE PROPOSED SOLUTION ......................................................103III. OUR EXPERIENCES ....................................................................106IV. THE FUTURE ............................................................................109

THE FUTURE OF MEDIATION IN THE PHILIPPINES

IS NOW ASSURED


THE GREAT PROMISE OF MEDIATION



INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE USE OF MEDIATION



THE MEDIATOR’S MISSION


USAID AND THE PHILIPPINES’ NEW PEACEMAKERS

Mr. Joseph S. Ryan, Jr. ..............................................................137


MEDIATION AND THE FAMILY COURT JUDGE

Judge Rosalina L. Pison ............................................................141


MEDIATION: A WONDER MEDICINE

Prosecutor Dominador D. Bornasal, Jr. ...............................148

IVIVIVIVIV. . . . . WWWWWRITERITERITERITERITE-----UPSUPSUPSUPSUPS

SC NEARS “ZERO BACKLOG” OF CASES

Public Information Office, Supreme Court .......................152

ARROYO LAUDS SUPREME COURT ON USE OF MEDIATION

Isabel C. De Leon, Manila Bulletin .......................................154

MEDIATION AS A TOOL

Opinion, Manila Standard ......................................................156

COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION

Larry Sipin, Manila StandardI. AMICABLE SETTLEMENT WEEKS ...........................................158II. MEDIATION PROCESS .............................................................159III. TO DIE FOR ...........................................................................160IV. GREAT POTENTIAL .................................................................162

THE LADY NEEDS A FACELIFT

Jullie Yap Daza, Manila Standard ..........................................163

CHASING THE WIND: MEDIATION AS A WAY OF LIFE

Felipe B. Miranda, The Philippine Star ................................167

WHY SUE WHEN YOU CAN SETTLE?Maricar Jara-Puyod, Manila StandardI. PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER ..........................................171II. JUDGE’S ROLE .........................................................................172III. HAZARDOUS WORK ................................................................173


THE FILIPINO WAY OF SETTLING DISPUTES

Fred de la Rosa, The Manila Times .......................................175

MEDIATION OF CASES IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

Francis Lim, The Philippine Star ...........................................179

xix

Foreword

It is with pride and a sense of accomplishment that the Academy presents this issue of the PHILJA Judicial Journal, with focus on mediation.

The use of mediation as an alternative mode of settling disputes has certainly seen a dramatic growth in the last year-and-a-half. Proof of this is the 80% success rate of the pilot projects conducted by the Academy. The value of mediation is acknowledged by the various stakeholders in the administration of justice, especially the litigants, many of whom have settled their long-standing disputes. In the advocates forums conducted, judicial officers and employees, the Bar, members of civil society organizations, the academe, media, the business sector, quasi-judicial bodies, and funding and oversight bodies have been made aware of and consulted on how to control case dockets and provide a less expensive and non-adversarial option to people who want to resolve their differences. It is heartening that mediation always figured prominently in the discussions.

The promotion of mediation is a significant undertaking

being diligently pursued by the Court, through the Academy, as an extra-judicial response to the growing need of like-minded individuals for social peace and harmony. Disseminating information regarding mediation, therefore, is not a mere journalistic exercise, but a demonstration of the institution’s recognition of the fact that there are private concerns more suitably untangled outside the court system. This issue on mediation serves this purpose.

Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. once extolled the

virtues of mediation when he said:

xx

There is no doubt that mediation will significantly reduce the workload of the courts. It can declog court dockets, promote the earlier settlement of cases, and increase public trust and confidence in a system that is perceived to be anti-poor or, at the very least, pro-rich because of the restrictive cost of filing and pursuing a case.

This statement is justified and validated each time a case ripe for adjudication is settled out of court.

It is anticipated that with the establishment of the

Philippine Mediation Center (PMC), with all mechanisms being put in place, and with the monthly reports coming in from the field, the positive effects of mediation will snowball. It is also expected to bring to the grassroots all the good gathered along the way, including the various ways by which personal conflicts can be explained and worked out. One such mechanism is the Mediation Journal.

This issue is envisioned to present the multi-faceted world

of mediation. Thus, along with an introduction to mediation and a list of some of the more recent resolutions, orders and circulars of the Court on the subject, this issue explores the nature and potential of mediation, its relation to bayanihan and the barangay justice system, the Philippine Mediation Center (PMC), and international developments in mediation. It also presents the human side of mediation by portraying the mediator as peacemaker, with anecdotes from practitioners. Such admixture of sum and substance makes for fine reading, as well as practical reference.

AMEURFINA A. MELENCIO HERRERA Chancellor

An Invitation To Mediation

Philippine Mediation Center∗ I. WHAT IS MEDIATION? II. ADVANTAGES OF MEDIATION III. CASES REFERABLE FOR MEDIATION IV. WHEN CAN MEDIATION BE ORDERED? V. SELECTION OF A MEDIATOR VI. CONFIDENTIALITY VII. VOLUNTARY PROCESS VIII. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH COMPROMISE

AGREEMENT IX. MEDIATION FEE X. PAYMENT OF MEDIATION FEE

I. WHAT IS MEDIATION?

Mediation is a process of resolving disputes with the aid of a neutral person who helps parties identify issues and develops proposals to resolve their disputes. Unlike arbitration, the Mediator is not empowered to decide disputes.

It is a process where the parties to a pending case are directed by the court to submit their dispute to the Mediator, a neutral third party, who works with them to reach a settlement of their controversy. The Mediator acts

_________________________________________________________ ∗ The Philippine Mediation Center, under the Philippine Judicial Academy, is the component unit of the Supreme Court for court-referred, court-related mediation cases and other alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.

THE PHILJA JUDICIAL JOURNAL [VOL. 4:11 2

as a facilitator for the parties to arrive at a mutually acceptable arrangement, which will be the basis for the court to render a judgment based on a compromise.

II. ADVANTAGES OF MEDIATION

a. It is effective. In the recent pilot project on Mediation conducted by PHILJA, 85% of cases referred for mediation reached settlement.

b. It is faster. Many cases reached settlement in one to two sessions. This saves parties enormous time and effort expended on litigation.

c. It is cost-saving. Unlike rigorous court proceedings, mediation is quick and therefore devoid of many legal and litigation expenses.

d. It is durable. Surveys conducted after mediation sessions reveal a high level of satisfaction among disputing parties. Close to 100% comply with agreements reached in mediation.

e. It restores relationships. Mediation is proven to restore relationships, long torn by conflict. This is so because the process addresses deep-rooted sources of misunderstanding.

III. CASES REFERABLE FOR MEDIATION

Under the Supreme Court approved guidelines, the courts may refer the following for mediation:

a. Civil cases, settlement of estates, and cases covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure, except those which by law may not be compromised;

2002] AN INVITATION TO MEDIATION 3

b. Cases cognizable by the Lupong Tagapamayapa under the Katarungang Pambarangay Law;

c. The civil aspect of BP 22 cases;

d. The civil aspect of quasi-offenses under Title 14 of the Revised Penal Code.

IV. WHEN CAN MEDIATION BE ORDERED?

The trial court, after determining the possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes of dispute resolution, shall issue an Order referring the case to the Philippine Mediation Center (PMC) unit for mediation, and direct the parties to proceed immediately to the PMC unit. The Order shall be personally given to the parties during pre-trial. Copy of the order, together with a copy of the Complaint and Answer/s, shall be furnished the PMC Unit within the same date.

V. SELECTION OF A MEDIATOR

The Supervisor of the PMC Unit shall assist the parties select a mutually acceptable Mediator from a list of duly accredited Mediators and inform the parties about the fees, if any, and the mode of payment. If the parties cannot agree on a Mediator, then the Supervisor shall assign one. The trial court shall immediately be notified of the name of the Mediator, and shall thereafter confirm his/her selection/appointment as such.

VI. CONFIDENTIALITY

Mediation is protected by confidentiality. Information discovered in mediation is inadmissible in court. A party cannot use information gathered in mediation against the


other party. The Mediator cannot be subpoenaed to reveal what transpired in mediation.

VII. VOLUNTARY PROCESS

What if it does not work?

Mediation is a purely voluntary process. Either of the parties and the Mediator can call it off at any time when it does not seem to be working. They can go back to the court and pursue litigation.

VIII. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH COMPROMISE AGREEMENT

What if the other party does not comply with the compromise agreement?

The concerned party can immediately apply for execution of the judgment/order to the trial court that approved the compromise agreement.

IX. MEDIATION FEE

How much will the parties spend if they agree to undergo mediation?

Both parties shall equally share the payment of the Mediation fee. The Mediation Fee shall be a certain percentage of the filing fee, to be paid separately from the filing fee, and in accordance with the Level of Mediators and the schedules presented in the table below:

2002] AN INVITATION TO MEDIATION 5

LEVEL AMOUNT

CHARGEABLE MINIMUM

FEE MAXIMUM

FEE I. Accredited Mediators who have handled less than 50 cases

20% of Filing Fee

P 1,000 P 10,000

II. Accredited Mediators who have handled more than 50 cases

25% of Filing Fee

P 2,000 P 30,000

III. Accredited Mediators who have handled more than 100 cases

30% of Filing Fee

P 3,000 P 50,000

X. PAYMENT OF MEDIATION FEE

Before the start of mediation, 50% of the mediation fee shall be paid to the Clerk of Court. Upon settlement of the case, the balance of the mediation fee shall also be paid to the Clerk of Court. If no compromise is reached, the downpayment is forfeited.

The Mediation Project I. MEDIATION IN GENERAL II. MEDIATION IN THE PHILIPPINES III. 1ST PILOT PROJECT ON COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION IV. 2ND PILOT TESTING OF COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION

A. Basic Seminar Workshop on Mediation 1. Objective 2. Qualifications of prospective mediators 3. Activities and Attendance 4. Observations / Recommendations

B. Internship Program 1. Objective 2. Program Proper 3. Activities

C. Refresher courses 1. Objectives 2. Activities and Attendance

D. Advocates Forums 1. Objectives 2. Attendance 3. Mediation Issues Clarified in the Forums

E. Mediation Conference and Workshop 1. Objective 2. Activity and Attendance

F. Settlement Weeks 1. Objective 2. Program Proper 3. Participating Courts 4. Mediators and Supervisors

2002] THE MEDIATION PROJECT

7

5. Results 6. Reasons for failed mediation 7. Reasons for cases returned to court 8. Types of cases referred for mediation 9. Mediators’ comments / observations 10. Recommendations by mediators

G. Launching of the Philippine Mediation Center (PMC) 1. Objectives 2. Activity 3. Attendance 4. Overall Recommendations

I. MEDIATION IN GENERAL

Mediation is a process of resolving disputes with the aid of a neutral person – the Mediator – who helps parties identify issues and develop proposals to resolve their disputes. Unlike arbitration, the mediator is not empowered to decide disputes.

It has two advantages: (1) It helps unclog court cases; and (2) It is a better and more civilized solution to disputes. It is subtle because solutions are offered in the form of a question, rather than a suggestion. It is humane because information is conveyed without the toxicity of animosity. It is enduring because interests, which are the rational basis for settlement, are explored.


II. MEDIATION IN THE PHILIPPINES

Par. (5), Section 5, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution mandates the Supreme Court to promulgate rules that shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases. Section 2(a), Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, require courts to “consider the possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes of resolution.” Mediation/conciliation is one of such alternative modes of dispute resolution that is not only speedy, but inexpensive as well.

Statistics from the Office of the Court Administrator showed that in the year 1999, the volume of cases filed and pending were as follows:

Branch/ Station

Total No. of Courts

CASES

Filed Decided Pending

Regional Trial Courts – NCJR 276 55,319 37,834 694,895

Regional Trial Courts – Regions1 to 12

674 65,515 45,418 1,410,400

Metropolitan Trial Courts

82 147,460 63,435 2,289,059

Municipal Trial Court in Cities

141 114,520 69,127 2,150,679

Municipal Trial Courts

425 94,645 57,469 1,432,194

Municipal Circuit Trial Courts

476 55,509 35,363 786,376

TOTAL 532,968 308,646 8,763,603


9

To cope with the volume of cases filed and pending, the Consultants Group of the Judicial Reforms Committee of the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) studied the feasibility of proposing the pilot testing of mandatory mediation. Thereafter, an ADR Sub-committee was created and chaired by former Ateneo de Manila University College of Law Dean Eduardo de los Angeles, with Amnesty Commission Chairman Alfredo F. Tadiar and former U.P. Law Dean Pacifico A. Agabin as members, to formulate plans for implementation of the proposal. The Supreme Court United Nations Development Program (SC-UNDP) and PHILEXPORT-TAPS funded the project.

A pilot project on court-referred mediation was proposed to the Supreme Court to test the efficacy of mandatory mediation in cases involving neighborhood disputes, creditor-debtor relationship, landlord-tenant relationships, land disputes, and vehicular accident cases.

The Supreme Court recognized the need to implement Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, and test the conclusion that mediation/conciliation is a speedy, inexpensive and simplified mode of dispute resolution by actual experiment in selected pilot areas.

The rules on mediation proceedings, which were to apply to the following cases, were submitted by PHILJA to the Supreme Court for approval:

1. Cases involving interpersonal relations and neighborhood disputes;

2. Collection cases based on creditor and debtor relationship;

3. Claims for damages;

4. Consumer disputes;


5. Disputes arising out of landlord-tenant relationship;

6. Minor criminal disputes such as: i. Violation of BP 22, estafa, threats, coercion, or

malicious mischief where the objective is the collection or recovery of damages;

ii. Private crimes committed without violence; and

iii. Vehicular accidents.

7. Settlement of estates.

On November 16, 1999, the Court issued amended guidelines for the implementation of the mediation/conciliation proceedings. Under the approved guidelines, the following are the cases referred for mediation:

1. Civil cases involving members of the same family within the sixth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, except those which by law cannot be subject to compromise, and civil disputes between residents of the same municipality or city cognizable by the Lupon Tagapamayapa in accordance with Section 408 of the Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act 7160);

2. Collection cases based on creditor and debtor relationship;

3. Claims for civil damages;

4. Disputes arising out of lessor-lessee tenant relationship.


11

III. 1ST PILOT PROJECT ON COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION

The Pilot Project on Court-Referred Mediation was aimed to test the efficacy of Mandatory Mediation as one of the solutions to congested court dockets.

The two project areas chosen were the Regional Trial Courts and Metropolitan Trial Courts of Mandaluyong and Valenzuela Cities. The Sub-Committee conducted, on June 25 to 27, 1999, a two (2) day training program in Subic for prospective mediators, who were selected from residents of the two cities for their patience, creativity, independence and impartiality. Eighteen (18) from Mandaluyong City and twelve (12) from Valenzuela City composed the thirty (30) participants. Upon approval by the Court of the guidelines implementing the project, the members of the ADR Sub-committee met with the judges, clerks of courts, and qualified mediators to orient them on the mechanics of mediation. The Mayors of both cities supported the project by providing a place for holding mediation sessions.

The pilot testing began on December 15, 1999 with the trial courts concerned referring for mediation collection, ejectment and accident cases. Actual mediation conferences were held during the last week of December 1999 to the end of February 2000. A monitoring team observed the mediation activities in both cities.

The result of the pilot testing showed promise: the success rate was 38 %. In Mandaluyong City, out of the forty-eight (48) cases referred for mediation, fifteen (15) cases resulted in compromise settlements, twenty-four (24) cases failed, and nine (9) cases did not undergo mediation as the parties did not agree. In Valenzuela City, of the fifty-two (52) cases referred for mediation, twelve (12) cases were


successful, twenty (20) cases failed, and twenty (20) did not undergo mediation for failure of the litigants to show up.

The Judicial Reforms Committee recommended that court-referred mediation be adopted in Mandaluyong and Valenzuela Cities, and that in other areas, training modules for prospective mediators for new pilot courts be conducted by PHILJA. In addition, judges and lawyers should be informed of the advantages of mediation.

IV. 2ND PILOT TESTING OF COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION

The Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA), through the ADR Subcommittee of the Consultants Group, Judicial Reforms Committee, submitted a proposal to the Supreme Court for the 2nd Pilot Testing of Court-Referred Mediation in the Regional Trial Courts and Family Courts of selected cities in Metro Manila.

The proposal, the first of its kind since the designation of Family Courts by the Supreme Court (AM 99-11-07 SC, February 1, 2000), was also submitted to The Asia Foundation (TAF) for funding of the project.

As a result of the favorable response of the Supreme Court and The Asia Foundation, PHILJA conducted the following activities:

a. Pre-Workshop Training;

b. Basic Mediation Workshop I;

c. Basic Mediation Workshop II;

d. Workshop on Family Mediation;

e. Internship Program in selected courts of pilot areas;


13

f. Evaluation Workshop on the Pilot Testing of Court-Referred Mediation.

Family Court judges and court personnel, PBA/IBP Lawyers, PHILJA staff and other professionals were identified and chosen as participants of the project. Trainees from various sectors were introduced to the lectures, skills and techniques on mediation.

The roster of lecturers included both local and foreign experts on mediation. The foreign lecturers were Judge Teh Hwee Hwee, Dr. Loong Seng Onn and Atty. George Lim from the Singapore Mediation Centre. The local lecturers: DCA Reynaldo L. Suarez, PHILJA Professor II and Executive Director, Judicial Reforms Committee; Dean Eduardo D. de los Angeles, Chairman of the ADR Subcommittee; Ms. Annabelle T. Abaya, a Harvard-trained Mediator; and Dr. Fortunato Gupit, PHILJA Lecturer on the Family Code.

The Internship Program was conducted in selected pilot courts situated in Mandaluyong, Pasay and Quezon Cities.

The Project registered a success rate of 85% (Mandaluyong City - 84%; Quezon City – 100 %; and Pasay City - 75%). The Academy’s Mediators increased from a total of 20 to 88. A. Basic Seminar Workshop on Mediation 1. Objective

To train prospective mediators on the basic skills and techniques of mediation.


2. Qualifications of Prospective Mediators

The Philippine Judicial Academy required the following qualifications of applicants to the proposed training of mediators:

a. Bachelor’s degree holder

b. 30 years of age and above

c. Exposure in work related to conflict resolution

d. Interest in the Project and availability 3. Activities and Attendance

Fourteen (14) Seminars and Workshops were completed: ten (10) in Metro Manila, two (2) in Cebu City and two (2) in Davao City. A total of four hundred four (404) potential mediators were trained. 4. Observations / Recommendations

a. Noticeably, there were no lectures on the laws on mediation and the correct writing of the Compromise Agreements.

b. Questions on legal issues raised during the open forum were not properly addressed.

c. No lecture on Filipino values and culture when there should have been one since our country is a melting pot of diverse languages and cultures, and mediation basically deals with personal conflict as well as behavior of people.

d. The Seminar has a total of eleven exercises. Some of these could be shifted into other substantial lectures to strengthen the foundation of the mediators.


15

e. There is a need to establish Guidelines on the Accreditation of Mediators.

B. Internship Program 1. Objective

To provide actual training for the new mediators.

2. Program Proper

After the Basic Seminar Workshop, the mediators moved to the next level, i.e., the Internship Program. Each mediator was assigned at least one case a week at a maximum of four weeks. The cases referred by the trial court were based on the Guidelines on Mediation approved by the Supreme Court on November 16, 1999, which provided for the rules of procedure in the conduct of the mediation proceedings. The mediators will apply the skills of mediation and try to work out a settlement in each of his assigned cases.

The trial court plays an important role in the Internship Program. It is responsible for the inventory, preparation and referral of cases for mediation. Notices/Orders were prepared by the Branch Clerks of Court duly signed by the Judges and sent at least one month prior to the scheduled mediation proceeding. The Notices/Orders contain the following:

a. Title and number of the case;

b. Name of the Mediator assigned;

c. Date and time of the session;

d. Authority for the Internship Program; and

e. Proper guidelines on mediation.


3. Activities

A total of fourteen (14) Internship Programs were completed. Ten (10) in Manila, two (2) in Cebu City and two (2) in Davao City. C. Refresher Courses 1. Objective

To update the trained mediators on their skills and knowledge of mediation. 2. Activities and Attendance

A total of six (6) Refresher courses were completed in Manila and attended by 960 mediators. D. Advocates Forums 1. Objectives

a. To introduce stakeholders to the concept and benefits of mediation;

b. To develop support for the use of mediation in the Philippines among significant stakeholders;

c. To clarify doubts and questions, and to allay fears and apprehensions on mediation.

2. Attendance

A total of seven hundred thirty-two (732) participants attended the forum series of eight, with the following as the breakdown:


17

Judges 83

Lawyers 63Business Groups 38

Government Sector 119Academe and NGOs 108

Media 32Cebu City (all sectors) 102

Davao City (all sectors) 187 Attendance of the judges, lawyers and business groups

was not as expected despite earnest efforts to encourage them to attend. Nevertheless, those who attended actively participated in the discussions during the open forum and showed real interest in mediation. The attendance of the government sector, academe and NGOs was encouraging. 3. Mediation Issues Clarified in the Forums

a. Cases filed in court that are not settled through the Lupon Tagapamayapa or are not within the jurisdiction of the Lupon can be referred for mediation.

b. Compromise agreements are submitted to the court. In case of default, a writ of execution may be issued.

c. The advantages and complications of including criminal cases, particularly B.P. 22, and negligence cases to the list of cases that can be referred by the court for mediation.

d. Guidelines which have yet to be approved by the Supreme Court on the fees for Mediators.

e. Once the case is already filed in court, there is no need to pay additional filing fees even if the case is referred for mediation.


f. As part of pre-trial, the judge must determine, using the guidelines issued by the Supreme Court, as to whether the case filed in court has a possibility of being referred for mediation. Upon determination that it is possible, the parties must voluntarily agree on mediation. Otherwise, it will go back to court.

g. Effect of mediation on lawyers’ fees.

h. Formulation of a Code of Ethics for Mediators to ensure impartiality.

i. Collaboration of the Judiciary with the other departments of government as to the training skills of other people practicing mediation in different areas of concern (e.g., barangay captains, Sangguniang Panlungsod, DTI, DAR)

j. Criteria for choosing a Mediator.

k. Period of mediation is limited to thirty (30) days, extendible for another thirty (30) days maximum with the consent of the judge.

l. Stand of the IBP regarding mediation (5 hours out of the 36 hours for continuing legal education should be devoted to ADR).

m. Application of mediation techniques in the barangay justice system.

n. Application of mediation in certain criminal cases (e.g., sexual harassment).


19

E. Mediation Conference and Workshop 1. Objective

To secure the stakeholders’ inputs on policy issues such as certification and maintenance of mediator competencies, professional fees, quality assurance, training standards, code of ethics and legislation.

2. Activity and Attendance

The Mediation Conference and Workshop was held on March 21, 2001, at the Manila Hotel, with a total of 325 participants. F. Settlement Weeks 1. Objective

To pilot test and implement mediation for two (2) weeks in Metro Manila, Cebu and Davao Cities. 2. Program Proper

The Settlement Weeks was the final activity in the implementation of the initial mediation project of the Academy. As approved by the Chief Justice, the period from March 26 to April 6, 2001 was declared the Amicable Settlement Weeks. It included all the Regional Trial Courts and Metropolitan Trial Courts in Metro Manila, and those in the Cities of Cebu and Davao, as well as their neighboring towns. Judges were instructed to audit at least twenty (20) cases in their dockets which may be referred for mediation.

The Courts were further enjoined to follow the given guidelines in implementing the said activity, namely:


a. To schedule at least two (2) cases each day, one in the morning and another in the afternoon, for the entire duration of the activity;

b. To follow closely the issuance and delivery of orders so as to give parties ample time to prepare and to appear in the scheduled mediation;

c. Assign a suitable place in the court in which both parties and the mediator can meet to discuss the nature of the case.

3. Participating Courts

A total of three hundred and nine (309) Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts, and Municipal Trial Courts participated in the Settlement Weeks: Metro Manila: Total: 244 Caloocan Las Piñas Makati Malabon Mandaluyong Manila Muntinlupa Navotas Parañaque Pasay Pasig Quezon City San Juan Taguig Valenzuela Marikina Cebu City: Total: 35 Cebu City Lapu-Lapu Mandaue


21

Davao City: Total: 30 Davao City Tagum Panabo Digos 4. Mediators and Supervisors

A total of three hundred thirty-five (335) Mediators and twenty (20) Supervisors participated in the Settlement Weeks:

CITY MEDIATORS SUPERVISORS Metro Manila 231 10

Cebu City 55 3 Davao City 49 7

5. Results Total:

Cases Referred 100% Not Mediated 71%

Mediated 29% Settled 81% Failed 19%

Metro Manila:




Cebu City:



Davao City:



6. Reasons for failed mediation

a. Impasse

b. Lack of time

c. Upon lawyer’s advice

d. Limited special power of attorney

e. Focus on non-mediatable issues

f. Inability to commit

g. High emotional level

7. Reasons for cases returned to court

a. Non-appearance of one party

b. Non-appearance of both parties

c. Not agreeable to mediation


23

d. Limited special power of attorney

e. Lack of time

8. Types of cases referred for mediation

a. Sum of money

b. Lessor-lessee

c. Family dispute

d. Estate proceedings

e. Damages

f. Rescission of contract

g. Specific performance

h. Ejectment

i. Replevin

j. Injunction

k. B.P. 22

l. Recovery of Possession

m. Nullity of contract 9. Mediators’ comments / observations

a. Limited time

b. Non-appearance of one or both parties

c. Limited special power of attorney

d. Uncooperative and grandstanding lawyers

e. Lack/Delay in delivery of orders

f. Parties are not supportive of mediation


g. Limited knowledge by disputants of mediation

h. Cases not properly screened (non-mediatable)

i. Unclear and disorderly scheduling of mediation session

j. Impasse

k. Venue not conducive for mediation

l. Heightened emotions

m. Lack of assistance from court personnel

n. Related cases in other courts not known

o. Not enough cases referred

p. Lack of Equipment

q. Language barrier

r. Litigants have very limited resources

s. Lack of documents

t. Lack of financial and moral support

u. Parties trying to seek legal advice from mediators

v. Difficulty in writing compromise agreements

10. Recommendations by Mediators

a. Use maximum of thirty (30) days allotted for mediation

b. Information dissemination on mediation

c. Cases should be classified and screened

d. Early distribution of orders

e. Educate lawyers


25

f. Permanent venue for mediation

g. Sanction for non-appearance

h. Seminar for Judges and Clerks of Court

i. Continuous training

j. Give enough time for corporations to prepare special power of attorney

k. Add instructions to order to bring special power of attorney

l. Exclusion of lawyers

m. Extend time for mediation

n. Institutionalize mediation

o. Use personal servers for delivery of orders

p. Assign a Mediator to a court

q. Integrate mediation in the Rules of Court

r. Be allowed to establish a private mediation clinic

s. Inform participating courts earlier G. Launching of the Philippine Mediation Center 1. Objectives

a. To promote the use of court-referred mediation;

b. To encourage the development of other mediation applications for the purpose of diversion of cases from the courts;

c. To provide training for the development of new mediators;


d. To accredit new mediators and determine continued authorization of mediators;

e. To ensure quality mediation services for court-referred mediation;

f. To provide mediation services for court-referred cases;

g. To develop and prescribe curriculum for mediation training for court-connected and legal education programs.

2. Activity Distribution of Awards and Citations of Appreciation, April 6, 2001, Citibank Towers, Makati

Certificates of appreciation was given to persons and organizations that helped in making the initial mediation project a success. Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. was assisted by Justice Antonio M. Martinez; Mr. Robert Wuertz, Democracy Officer of USAID; and Dr. Steven Rood, Representative of The Asia Foundation.

3. Attendance

A total of one hundred ninety-four (194) participants attended the launching of the PMC consisting of the following:

Special Guests 64 Mediators 130


27

4. Overall Recommendations

a. Enjoin judges, court personnel, lawyers and other sectors to provide more support and cooperation in the development of mediation, as a mode of alternative dispute resolution, to help unclog the court dockets. The mandatory character of administrative circulars must be stressed.

b. Further study on the data gathered in various mediation activities for the establishment and amendment of policies and guidelines in mediation for its proper implementation.

c. Training of additional trainors to respond to several requests for training of mediators in different areas of the country.

d. Inclusion of mediation/negotiation as a course in law schools. Provide training to law professors on mediation.

e. For trainings in the future:

i. Include topics on Laws on Mediation, Writing of Compromise Agreements, and Filipino values and Culture;

ii. Have at least three lecturers for the basic training in order to have a comprehensive approach and overview on mediation;

iii. Different levels of training depending on the qualifications of the mediators.


Prepared by: (Sgd.) MA. CRISTINA M. CABRERA (Sgd.) JOSE T. NAME, JR. Project Director Project Coordinator

Noted by:

(Sgd.) ANTONIO M. MARTINEZ (Sgd.) REYNALDO L. SUAREZ Vice-Chancellor Head, Judicial Reforms Office

Attested by:

(Sgd.) AMEURFINA A. MELENCIO HERRERA Chancellor

RRRRReeeeepubpubpubpubpublic oflic oflic oflic oflic of the Philippines the Philippines the Philippines the Philippines the PhilippinesSuprSuprSuprSuprSupreme Coureme Coureme Coureme Coureme Courttttt

ManilaManilaManilaManilaManila

TTTTTOOOOO ::::: TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE R R R R REGIONEGIONEGIONEGIONEGIONALALALALAL TTTTTRIALRIALRIALRIALRIAL C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTSTSTSTSTS ANDANDANDANDAND

MMMMMETRETRETRETRETROPOLITOPOLITOPOLITOPOLITOPOLITANANANANAN TTTTTRIALRIALRIALRIALRIAL C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTSTSTSTSTS OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MANDANDANDANDANDALALALALALUYUYUYUYUYONGONGONGONGONG

CCCCCITYITYITYITYITY ANDANDANDANDAND VVVVVALENZUELAALENZUELAALENZUELAALENZUELAALENZUELA C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY

RERERERERE ::::: AAAAAMENDEDMENDEDMENDEDMENDEDMENDED G G G G GUIDELINESUIDELINESUIDELINESUIDELINESUIDELINES FORFORFORFORFOR THETHETHETHETHE I I I I IMPLEMENTMPLEMENTMPLEMENTMPLEMENTMPLEMENTAAAAATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION/C/C/C/C/CONCILIAONCILIAONCILIAONCILIAONCILIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION P P P P PRRRRROCEEDINGSOCEEDINGSOCEEDINGSOCEEDINGSOCEEDINGS INININININ

THETHETHETHETHE P P P P PILILILILILOOOOOTTTTT A A A A AREASREASREASREASREAS OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MANDANDANDANDANDALALALALALUYUYUYUYUYONGONGONGONGONG C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY ANDANDANDANDAND

VVVVVALENZUELAALENZUELAALENZUELAALENZUELAALENZUELA C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY

Pursuant to par. (5), Section 5, Article VIII of the 1987Constitution mandating the Supreme Court to promulgate rulesthat shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure forthe speedy disposition of cases and Section 2(a), Rule 18 ofthe 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, requiring thecourts to “consider the possibility of an amicable settlementor of a submission to alternative modes of resolution;”

Considering that Mediation/Conciliation is one of suchalternative modes of dispute resolution that is not only speedybut inexpensive as well; and

Recognizing that there is a need to implement Rule 18 ofthe 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, and test theconclusion that mediation/conciliation is a speedy, inexpensiveand simplified mode of dispute resolution by actual experimentin selected pilot areas of Mandaluyong City and ValenzuelaCity, the following guidelines are hereby issued for theinformation and direction of the Regional Trial Courts and

30 THE PHILJA JUDICIAL JOURNAL [VOL. 4:11

Metropolitan Trial Courts of the aforementioned areas:

1. Applicability – These rules on mediation/conciliationproceeding shall apply to the following cases:

a. Civil cases involving members of the same family withinthe sixth civil degree of consanguinity or affinity, exceptthose which by law cannot be the subject ofcompromise, and civil disputes between residents ofthe same municipality or city cognizable by the LuponTagapamayapa in accordance with Section 408 of theLocal Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act 7160);

b. Collection cases based on creditor and debtorrelationship;

c. Claims for civil damages;

d. Disputes arising out of lessor-lessee tenant relationship.

2. List of Mediators/Conciliators – The Supreme Court shallprovide the Regional Trial Courts and Metropolitan TrialCourts a list of Mediators/Conciliators consisting ofpersons who are of known probity and impartiality,innovative, patient, understanding and approachable andwho have undergone proper and appropriate training onmediation/conciliation.

3. Initial Conference –a. Order to attend – After the filing of the pre-trial briefs,

the court motu proprio may call the parties to aconference without the assistance of counsel providedthat, at the option of the parties, counsel may be allowedto provide legal assistance to their clients. When

312002] AMENDED GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATIONOF MEDIATION/CONCILIATION PROCEEDINGS

circumstances warrant or when the parties signify theirintention to settle their dispute, the Court may, evenduring trial, order mediation and appoint a mediatorto assist the parties in reaching settlement.

b. Matters to be taken up – During the conference, thePresiding Judge shall encourage the parties to submittheir dispute to mediation/conciliation for a fair andmutually beneficial compromise that will terminate thepending action.

c. Referral – The Court shall issue an Order suspendingthe proceedings for thirty (30) days to allow the partiesa reasonable time to reach a compromise agreement withthe aid of the designated Mediator/Conciliator. A copyof this Order shall be furnished the Mediator/Conciliator and the parties directing them to meet ona time and date stated therein at a designated place.

4. Mediation/Conciliation Proceedings –a. A joint conference shall first be held with both parties-

litigants present. The Mediator/Conciliator shallexplain the mediation/conciliation proceedingsstressing the benefits of an early settlement of thedispute and shall attempt immediate settlement. If nosettlement is reached at this conference, the Mediator/Conciliator may then hold separate conferences witheach party on such dates and times as may be agreedupon by the parties and the Mediator/Conciliator todetermine their respective real interest in the dispute.Thereafter, another joint conference may be held toconsider various options proposed by the Mediator/Conciliator to resolve the dispute.


b. Mediators/Conciliators shall be considered as officers ofthe court when they are in the actual performance of duties,or when acting on the occasion or by reason thereof.

c. The Mediators/Conciliators shall submit to the Courtwhere the case is pending a report on the progress ofthe proceedings once every thirty (30) days.

d. At the end of the thirty (30) day period allowed by theCourt, if no settlement has been reached, the case mustbe returned to the Court for further proceedings, unlessthe parties agree to further continue the mediation/conciliation, in which case a last extension of thirty(30) days may be granted by the Court.

5. Proceedings in case of Successful Settlement –a. If the mediation/conciliation is successful, the Court

shall immediately be informed and given the originalCompromise Agreement entered into by the parties asbasis for the rendition of a judgment by compromisewhich may be enforced by execution.

b. If the party obliged by the mediated/conciliatedsettlement for thwith fully complies with hisundertaking to pay, deliver, perform, vacate or do someother act, so that nothing more remains to be done, aCertificate of Satisfaction shall be signed by the partyconcerned and the case may be dismissed upon hismotion or upon the Court’s own motion.

6. Proceedings in case of Failure to Settle – If the mediation/conciliation is not successful, the Mediator/Conciliatorconcerned shall issue a “Certificate of Failed Mediation/

332002] AMENDED GUIDELINES FOR THE IMPLEMENTATIONOF MEDIATION/CONCILIATION PROCEEDINGS

Conciliation” for the purpose of returning the case forfurther judicial proceedings.

7. Confidentiality of Records – To encourage the spontaneitythat is conducive to effective communication, therebyenhancing the possibility of successful mediation/conciliation efforts, the mediation/conciliation proceedingsand all incidents thereto shall be kept strictly confidentialincluding any admissions, statements, or other evidenceadduced therein.

8. Compensation of Mediators/Conciliators – The Courtshall allow the Mediator/Conciliator such reasonablecompensation as the circumstances of the case warrant, tobe taxed as against the party obligor under the CompromiseAgreement, or apportioned between the parties, as justicerequires.

9. Period of mediation excluded – The period during whichthe case is undergoing mediation/conciliation shall beexcluded from the regular and mandatory periods for trialand rendition of judgment in ordinary cases and in casesunder summary procedure.

10. Forms – The judges shall be provided the necessary legalforms to implement this order.

Strict compliance with these guidelines is enjoined. ThisAdministrative Order shall be effective immediately.

Manila, Philippines, November 16, 1999.



AdministratiAdministratiAdministratiAdministratiAdministrativvvvve Ore Ore Ore Ore Order Noder Noder Noder Noder No. 21-2001. 21-2001. 21-2001. 21-2001. 21-2001

RERERERERE ::::: PPPPPARARARARARTICIPTICIPTICIPTICIPTICIPAAAAATIONTIONTIONTIONTION INININININ THETHETHETHETHE A A A A AMICABLEMICABLEMICABLEMICABLEMICABLE S S S S SETTLEMENTETTLEMENTETTLEMENTETTLEMENTETTLEMENT WWWWWEEKSEEKSEEKSEEKSEEKS

TTTTTOOOOO ::::: AAAAALLLLLLLLLL J J J J JUDGESUDGESUDGESUDGESUDGES ANDANDANDANDAND C C C C CLERKSLERKSLERKSLERKSLERKS OFOFOFOFOF C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTTTTT OFOFOFOFOF THETHETHETHETHE R R R R REGIONEGIONEGIONEGIONEGIONALALALALAL

TTTTTRIALRIALRIALRIALRIAL C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTSTSTSTSTS, M, M, M, M, METRETRETRETRETROPOLITOPOLITOPOLITOPOLITOPOLITANANANANAN TTTTTRIALRIALRIALRIALRIAL C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTSTSTSTSTS, , , , , ANDANDANDANDAND

MMMMMUNICIPUNICIPUNICIPUNICIPUNICIPALALALALAL TTTTTRIALRIALRIALRIALRIAL C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTSTSTSTSTS INININININ VVVVVALENZUELAALENZUELAALENZUELAALENZUELAALENZUELA C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY,,,,,KKKKKALALALALALOOKANOOKANOOKANOOKANOOKAN C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY, M, M, M, M, MANILAANILAANILAANILAANILA, Q, Q, Q, Q, QUEZONUEZONUEZONUEZONUEZON C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY, P, P, P, P, PASAASAASAASAASAYYYYY C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY,,,,,MMMMMAKAAKAAKAAKAAKATITITITITI C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY, P, P, P, P, PASIGASIGASIGASIGASIG C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY, M, M, M, M, MALABONALABONALABONALABONALABON, M, M, M, M, MARIKINARIKINARIKINARIKINARIKINAAAAA,,,,,MMMMMANDANDANDANDANDALALALALALUYUYUYUYUYONGONGONGONGONG C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY, P, P, P, P, PARAÑAARAÑAARAÑAARAÑAARAÑAQQQQQUEUEUEUEUE C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY, L, L, L, L, LASASASASAS PIÑASPIÑASPIÑASPIÑASPIÑAS

CCCCCITYITYITYITYITY, M, M, M, M, MUNTINLUNTINLUNTINLUNTINLUNTINLUPUPUPUPUPAAAAA C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY, D, D, D, D, DAAAAAVVVVVAAAAAOOOOO C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY ANDANDANDANDAND C C C C CEBEBEBEBEBUUUUU C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY

Rule 18, Section 2 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedureprovides that the pre-trial, which is mandatory, shall consider,inter alia, “[t]he possibility of an amicable settlement or of asubmission to alternative modes of dispute resolution.”

The priorities in the Action Program for Judicial Reformunder the section on Judicial Systems and Procedure includealternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms, particularly,the “establishment of a court-annexed mediation system.” Andone of the activities in the year-long celebration of the SupremeCourt Centenary is to test the efficacy of court-referredmediation as an alternative mode of resolution of disputes filedin courts.

In line with the foregoing, the period from 26 March to 6April 2001 is hereby declared Amicable Settlement Weeks. The

352002] A.O. NO. 21-2001

participants are the Judges and Clerks of Courts of the courtsenumerated above, who are hereby enjoined to comply strictlywith the Revised Guidelines approved by the Supreme Court inits Resolution of 16 November 1999 in A.M. No. 99-6-01-SC-PHILJA. A copy of the Revised Guidelines is hereto attachedand made an integral part of this Administrative Order.

The participating courts are further enjoined to:

1. Audit and cause an inventory of the cases in theirdockets and select at least 20 cases therefrom, whichmay be referred for ADR. The cases which may bereferred are family disputes, except those which, by law,cannot be settled by compromise; civil tenancy cases;creditor-debtor relationship cases; collection cases;damage suits; and all civil cases that may have a goodchance of being settled. These cases, which may eitherbe at the pre-trial stage or on trial proper, may bereferred to the Mediators during the AmicableSettlement Weeks;

2. Issue, on or before 28 February 2001, an Order advisingthe parties that their cases are referred to a Mediatorfor mediation purposes. The name of the Mediatorwill be sent beforehand to these courts by the PhilippineJudicial Academy (PHILJA) so that the concernedcourts can cite the name in the Order. Attached is asample of the Order which may be issued;

3. Ensure that at least one case in the morning and anothercase in the afternoon are scheduled for mediation eachday for the entire duration of the Amicable SettlementWeeks;


4. See to it that the Order are promptly issued and servedso as to ensure that the parties receive notice thereofwithin a reasonable period and appear on the dates theircases are scheduled for mediation; and

5. Assign a suitable place in the court that will be availablefor the mediator and parties on the given dates per theOrder issued.

Any question concerning this Administrative Order andthe activities pertaining to the Amicable Settlement Weeks maybe directed to Hon. Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera,Chancellor, Philippine Judicial Academy, with Tel. Nos. (02)523-6277 & (02) 523-9075; or to DCA (Ret.) Reynaldo L.Suarez, Head, Judicial Reforms Office, with Tel. No. 524-5981.

Strict compliance with this Administrative Order is herebyenjoined.

Issued this 20th day of February 2001.

(Sgd.) HILARIO G. DAVIDE, Jr. Chief Justice



AdministratiAdministratiAdministratiAdministratiAdministrativvvvve Ore Ore Ore Ore Order Noder Noder Noder Noder No. 24-2001. 24-2001. 24-2001. 24-2001. 24-2001

RERERERERE ::::: IIIIINCLNCLNCLNCLNCLUSIONUSIONUSIONUSIONUSION OFOFOFOFOF A A A A ADDITIONDDITIONDDITIONDDITIONDDITIONALALALALAL P P P P PARARARARARTICIPTICIPTICIPTICIPTICIPANTSANTSANTSANTSANTS INININININ THETHETHETHETHE

AAAAAMICABLEMICABLEMICABLEMICABLEMICABLE S S S S SETTLEMENTETTLEMENTETTLEMENTETTLEMENTETTLEMENT WWWWWEEKSEEKSEEKSEEKSEEKS

TTTTTOOOOO ::::: AAAAALLLLLLLLLL J J J J JUDGESUDGESUDGESUDGESUDGES ANDANDANDANDAND C C C C CLERKSLERKSLERKSLERKSLERKS OFOFOFOFOF C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTTTTT OFOFOFOFOF THETHETHETHETHE R R R R REGIONEGIONEGIONEGIONEGIONALALALALAL

TTTTTRIALRIALRIALRIALRIAL C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTSTSTSTSTS, M, M, M, M, MUNICIPUNICIPUNICIPUNICIPUNICIPALALALALAL TTTTTRIALRIALRIALRIALRIAL C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTSTSTSTSTS INININININ C C C C CITIESITIESITIESITIESITIES

ANDANDANDANDAND M M M M MUNICIPUNICIPUNICIPUNICIPUNICIPALALALALAL TTTTTRIALRIALRIALRIALRIAL C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTSTSTSTSTS INININININ M M M M MANDANDANDANDANDAAAAAUEUEUEUEUE C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY,,,,,LLLLLAPUAPUAPUAPUAPU-----LAPULAPULAPULAPULAPU C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY, D, D, D, D, DIGOSIGOSIGOSIGOSIGOS C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY, , , , , TTTTTAAAAAGUMGUMGUMGUMGUM C C C C CITYITYITYITYITY, , , , , ANDANDANDANDAND

PPPPPANANANANANABOABOABOABOABO, D, D, D, D, DAAAAAVVVVVAAAAAOOOOO DELDELDELDELDEL N N N N NORORORORORTETETETETE.....

WHEREAS, on 20 February 2001, the Chief Justice issuedAdministrative Order No. 21-2001 on the matter ofparticipation of some courts in the Settlement Weeks. A copyof said Administrative Order with the annexed Guidelines ishereto attached as Annex “A” and is made part hereof.

WHEREAS, in her letter of 27 February 2001, Mme.Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera, Chancellor of thePhilippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA), informed the ChiefJustice that there is a strong clamor by the Bench and the Bar,as well as by the trained mediators, to include, as participatingcourts during the Settlement Weeks, the Regional Trial Courts,Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, and Municipal Trial Courtsin Lapu-Lapu City, Mandaue City, Tagum City, Digos City,and Panabo of Davao del Norte.


WHEREAS, according to Mme. Chancellor Herrera, thenumber of trained mediators is enough to cover these additionalparticipating courts.

NOW , THEREFORE, the Regional Trial Courts,Municipal Trial Courts in Cities and the Municipal Trial Courtsin Mandaue City, Lapu-Lapu City, Digos City and Tagum Cityand in the Municipality of Panabo, Davao del Norte, are herebyincluded as participants in the Amicable Settlement Weeks. TheJudges and Clerks of Court thereof are enjoined to complywith Administrative Order No. 21-2001, copy attached.

Issued this 5th day of March 2001.

(Sgd.) HILARIO G. DAVIDE, Jr. Chief Justice



Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution ofthe Court En Banc dated

16 October 2001

“A.M. No. 01-10-5-SC-PHILJA. – Re: Various Resolutionsof the Board of Trustees of the PHILJA Approved During itsMeetings on 18 September 2001 and 1 October 2001. – Actingon the Letter dated 10 October 2001 of PHILJA ChancellorAmeurfina A. Melencio-Herrera, the Court Resolved toAPPROVE the following resolutions of the Board of Trusteesof the Philippine Judicial Academy:

a. Resolution No. 01-19, recommending the appointmentof former Deputy Court Administrator Bernardo T.Ponferrada to the position of PHILJA Professor II ona full-time basis, with additional functions as Head ofthe Judicial Reforms Office, effective 16 August 2001;

b. Resolution No. 01-20, recommending the accreditationof twenty (20) additional Mediators, subject to thefollowing conditions:

i. The accreditation shall be effective for a period oftwo (2) years;


ii. The accredited Mediators shall maintain goodstanding; and

iii. The accredited Mediators shall complete, withinthe two (2) year period, refresher courses andevaluation exercises to be given by the PHILJA;

(c) Resolution No. 01-23, recommending the approval ofthe institutionalization of Mediation in the Philippines,Re: Designating the Philippine Judicial Academy(PHILJA) as the component unit of the Supreme Courtfor court-referred, court-related Mediation cases andother alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, andestablishing the Philippine Mediation Center for thepurpose.

In keeping with the policy declared in Section 1 of R.A.8557 “to ensure an efficient and credible Judiciary” in relationto Section 3 of the same law mandating PHILJA “to performsuch other functions and duties as may be necessary in carryingout its mandate;” consistent with one of the objectives of theAction Program for Judicial Reform (APJR), particularly thedecongestion of court dockets, and the enhancement of accessto justice; and towards the effective implementation of Section2(a), Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, theSupreme Court hereby designates the Philippine JPhilippine JPhilippine JPhilippine JPhilippine JudicialudicialudicialudicialudicialAcademAcademAcademAcademAcademy (PHILJy (PHILJy (PHILJy (PHILJy (PHILJA) as its component unit fA) as its component unit fA) as its component unit fA) as its component unit fA) as its component unit for couror couror couror couror court-rt-rt-rt-rt-refefefefeferererererrrrrred,ed,ed,ed,ed,courcourcourcourcourt-rt-rt-rt-rt-related mediation cases, and other felated mediation cases, and other felated mediation cases, and other felated mediation cases, and other felated mediation cases, and other forororororms ofms ofms ofms ofms of Alter Alter Alter Alter AlternatinatinatinatinativvvvveeeeeDispute RDispute RDispute RDispute RDispute Resolution mecesolution mecesolution mecesolution mecesolution mechanisms, and estabhanisms, and estabhanisms, and estabhanisms, and estabhanisms, and establishes thelishes thelishes thelishes thelishes thePhilippine Mediation Center (PMC).Philippine Mediation Center (PMC).Philippine Mediation Center (PMC).Philippine Mediation Center (PMC).Philippine Mediation Center (PMC).

x x x

412002] A.M. NO. 01-10-05-SC-PHILJA

d. Resolution No. 01-24, recommending approval of theMemorandum of Agreement between the PHILJA andthe Philippine Mediation Foundation, Inc.

x x x

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO Clerk of Court

By: (Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA Assistant Clerk of Court


OfOfOfOfOffffffice ofice ofice ofice ofice of the Cour the Cour the Cour the Cour the Court Administratort Administratort Administratort Administratort AdministratorManilaManilaManilaManilaManila

CirCirCirCirCircular Nocular Nocular Nocular Nocular No. 82-2001. 82-2001. 82-2001. 82-2001. 82-2001

TTTTTOOOOO ::::: AAAAALLLLLLLLLL E E E E EXECUTIVEXECUTIVEXECUTIVEXECUTIVEXECUTIVE J J J J JUDGESUDGESUDGESUDGESUDGES S S S S STTTTTAAAAATIONEDTIONEDTIONEDTIONEDTIONED INININININ M M M M METRETRETRETRETROOOOO

MMMMMANILAANILAANILAANILAANILA, C, C, C, C, CEBEBEBEBEBUUUUU, D, D, D, D, DAAAAAVVVVVAAAAAOOOOO, , , , , ANDANDANDANDAND A A A A ALLLLLLLLLL O O O O OTHERTHERTHERTHERTHER A A A A AREASREASREASREASREAS TTTTTHAHAHAHAHATTTTT

MMMMMAAAAAYYYYY B B B B BEEEEE F F F F FURURURURURTHERTHERTHERTHERTHER O O O O ORRRRRGANIZEDGANIZEDGANIZEDGANIZEDGANIZED ANDANDANDANDAND D D D D DESIGNESIGNESIGNESIGNESIGNAAAAATEDTEDTEDTEDTED, , , , , TTTTTOOOOO

AAAAASSISTSSISTSSISTSSISTSSIST ANDANDANDANDAND S S S S SUPPORUPPORUPPORUPPORUPPORTTTTT THETHETHETHETHE P P P P PHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE J J J J JUDICIALUDICIALUDICIALUDICIALUDICIAL

AAAAACADEMYCADEMYCADEMYCADEMYCADEMY (PHILJ (PHILJ (PHILJ (PHILJ (PHILJA) A) A) A) A) INININININ THETHETHETHETHE O O O O ORRRRRGANIZAGANIZAGANIZAGANIZAGANIZATIONTIONTIONTIONTION,,,,,OOOOOPERAPERAPERAPERAPERATIONTIONTIONTIONTION ANDANDANDANDAND M M M M MAINTENAINTENAINTENAINTENAINTENANCEANCEANCEANCEANCE OFOFOFOFOF THETHETHETHETHE P P P P PHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION C C C C CENTERENTERENTERENTERENTER U U U U UNITSNITSNITSNITSNITS

RERERERERE ::::: DDDDDESIGNESIGNESIGNESIGNESIGNAAAAATIONTIONTIONTIONTION OFOFOFOFOF THETHETHETHETHE P P P P PHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE J J J J JUDICIALUDICIALUDICIALUDICIALUDICIAL A A A A ACADEMYCADEMYCADEMYCADEMYCADEMY

ASASASASAS THETHETHETHETHE C C C C COMPONENTOMPONENTOMPONENTOMPONENTOMPONENT U U U U UNITNITNITNITNIT OFOFOFOFOF THETHETHETHETHE S S S S SUPREMEUPREMEUPREMEUPREMEUPREME C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTTTTT

FORFORFORFORFOR C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTTTTT-R-R-R-R-REFERREDEFERREDEFERREDEFERREDEFERRED, C, C, C, C, COUROUROUROUROURTTTTT-R-R-R-R-RELAELAELAELAELATEDTEDTEDTEDTED M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

CCCCCASESASESASESASESASES ANDANDANDANDAND O O O O OTHERTHERTHERTHERTHER A A A A ALLLLLTERNTERNTERNTERNTERNAAAAATIVESTIVESTIVESTIVESTIVES D D D D DISPUTEISPUTEISPUTEISPUTEISPUTE

RRRRRESOLESOLESOLESOLESOLUTIONUTIONUTIONUTIONUTION M M M M MECHANISMSECHANISMSECHANISMSECHANISMSECHANISMS ANDANDANDANDAND E E E E ESTSTSTSTSTABLISHMENTABLISHMENTABLISHMENTABLISHMENTABLISHMENT OFOFOFOFOF

THETHETHETHETHE P P P P PHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION C C C C CENTERENTERENTERENTERENTER (PMC) F (PMC) F (PMC) F (PMC) F (PMC) FOROROROROR

TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE P P P P PURPOSEURPOSEURPOSEURPOSEURPOSE

Pursuant to a Supreme Court en banc Resolution inAdministrative Matter No. 01-10-5-SC-PHILJA, datedOctober 16, 2001, designating the Philippine Judicial Academy(PHILJA) as the component unit of the Supreme Court forcourt-referred and court-related mediation cases and otheralternative dispute resolution mechanisms, and establishing thePhilippine Mediation Center (PMC) for the purpose, theExecutive Judges are hereby ordered to:

432002] CIRCULAR NO. 82-2001

1. Direct the Judges within their jurisdiction, where PMCunits are organized and existing, to refer cases tomediation pursuant to the Second Revised Guidelinesfor the Implementation of Mediation Proceedings;

2. Provide a permanent mediation room/space includingbasic equipment, if available, for PMC units in thedifferent courthouses and in such other places as maybe necessary;

3. Encourage the Judges and Court Personnel, beforewhose court the case subject of mediation is pending,to extend to the Mediator, every possible support andassistance;

4. Designate a Clerk-in-Charge to coordinate between thecourts and Mediators and Supervisors in every PMCunit;

5. Direct the Clerk of Court to collect and depositMediation Fees pursuant to the procedures prescribedin the Compensation Guidelines for Mediators andSupervisors;

6. Direct the Clerk of Court to submit a monthlycollection and remittance report to the MediationGroup of PHILJA (PMC Form No. F1);

7. Direct the Clerk-in-Charge to submit a monthlymediation report duly noted by the Executive Judge tothe Mediation Division of PHILJA furnishing a copythereof to the OCA (PMC Form No. E2);


8. Ensure the proper implementation of approvedmediation structures and guidelines in their respectiveareas, so as to institutionalize mediation in thePhilippines; and

9. Disseminate the attached documents to all concerned.

For strict compliance.

Manila, November 12, 2001.

(Sgd.) PRESBITERO J. VELASCO, Jr. Court Administrator

TTTTTHEMESHEMESHEMESHEMESHEMES OFOFOFOFOF S S S S SPEECHESPEECHESPEECHESPEECHESPEECHES


MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION, B, B, B, B, BAAAAAYYYYYANIHANANIHANANIHANANIHANANIHAN ANDANDANDANDAND

THETHETHETHETHE B B B B BARANGAARANGAARANGAARANGAARANGAYYYYY J J J J JUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICE S S S S SYYYYYSTEMSTEMSTEMSTEMSTEM

PPPPPHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION C C C C CENTERENTERENTERENTERENTER






MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION: A S: A S: A S: A S: A SPEEDPEEDPEEDPEEDPEEDYYYYY ANDANDANDANDAND I I I I INEXPENSIVENEXPENSIVENEXPENSIVENEXPENSIVENEXPENSIVE

DDDDDISPENSAISPENSAISPENSAISPENSAISPENSATIONTIONTIONTIONTION OFOFOFOFOF J J J J JUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICE

DEAN REYNALDO L. SUAREZ.ADVOCATES FORUMS FOR CEBU (WATERFRONT HOTEL),

DAVAO (MARCO POLO HOTEL), FOR JUDGES (METROPOLITAN CLUB),BUSINESS (COURT OF APPEALS AUDITORIUM), AND THE

GOVERNMENT SECTOR (COURT OF APPEALS AUDITORIUM)JANUARY 19, JANUARY 25, FEBRUARY 1,FEBRUARY 15, AND FEBRUARY 22, 2001

TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE F F F F FAAAAACILITCILITCILITCILITCILITAAAAATIVETIVETIVETIVETIVE N N N N NAAAAATURETURETURETURETURE OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

JUDGE ADRIANO R. OSORIO (RET.)ADVOCATES FORUMS FOR JUDGES AND FOR LAWYERS

FEBRUARY 1 AND 2, 2001METROPOLITAN CLUB, MAKATI CITY

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION ANDANDANDANDAND C C C C CONSENSUONSENSUONSENSUONSENSUONSENSUALALALALAL D D D D DEMOCRAREMOCRAREMOCRAREMOCRAREMOCRARYYYYY

PRESIDENT GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO

MEDIATION CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOP

MARCH 21, 2001MANILA HOTEL

Mediation: A SpeedMediation: A SpeedMediation: A SpeedMediation: A SpeedMediation: A Speedy and Iney and Iney and Iney and Iney and InexpensixpensixpensixpensixpensivvvvveeeeeDispensation ofDispensation ofDispensation ofDispensation ofDispensation of J J J J Justiceusticeusticeusticeustice∗

Dean Reynaldo L. Suarez∗∗∗∗∗ ∗∗∗∗∗

A pilot project on court-referred mediation was proposed tothe Supreme Court by the PHILJA to test the efficacy ofmandatory mediation. This proposal was approved by theSupreme Court on June 22, 1999 and upon its approval, theJudicial Reforms Office, which I now head, constituted a Sub-Committee on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), headedby Dean Eduardo de los Angeles, to formulate plans for theproject.

Mediation is a process whereby the parties to a pendingcase are enjoined by the Court to submit their disputes to aneutral third party, called the Mediator, who works with themto reach a settlement of their controversy. The mediator actsas a facilitator for the parties to arrive at a mutually acceptablearrangement, which will be the basis for the court to render ajudgment by compromise.

∗ Delivered at the Advocates Forums for Cebu (Waterfront Hotel), Davao (MarcoPolo Hotel), for Judges (Metropolitan Club), Business (Court of AppealsAuditorium), and the Government Sector (Court of Appeals Auditorium)respectively held on January 19, January 25, February 1, February 15, and February22, 2001.

∗∗ DCA Reynaldo L. Suarez (ret.) was formerly Executive Director of the JudicialReforms Committee of the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA). He is nowDean of the University of the East College of Law.


Alternative Dispute Resolution is receiving worldwideattention as a promising solution to the perennial problem ofclogged and distended court dockets. In our jurisdiction, wefind in Par. (5), Sec. 5, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitutionthe mandate for the Supreme Court to promulgate rules thatshall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for thespeedy disposition of cases and Sec. 2 (a) Rule 18 of the 1987Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended, require the courts toconsider the possibility of an amicable settlement or of asubmission to alternative modes of dispute resolution. TheSupreme Court has recognized that there is indeed a need toimplement Rule 18 of the 1987 Rules of Civil Procedure andto test the conclusion that mediation is a speedy, inexpensiveand simplified mode of dispute resolution.

Mediation is one of such alternative mode of disputeresolution that is not only speedy, but inexpensive as well. Laterduring the program, some of the speakers will tell us thestatistics gathered about its efficiency as pilot-tested in someof the Courts in Manila, Quezon City, Caloocan, Valenzuela,Pasig, Pasay, Makati, Mandaluyong, Cebu and Davao Cities.

Since June last year, we have started recruiting mediators inManila, Davao and Cebu, and to date, we have about 280 trainedmediators whose qualification went under rigid examinationand a rigorous basic training program. They were sent to variouscourts on an intensive internship period of one month by doingactual mediation of parties in dispute in the courts I have earliermentioned. The mediators we have recruited consist of personswho are of known probity and impartiality, innovative, patient,understanding and approachable. Some retired judges, a retiredjustice of the Court of Appeals, retired school superintendents,

492002] MEDIATION: A SPEEDY AND INEXPENSIVEDISPENSATION OF JUSTICE

priests, lawyers, doctors, psychologists, and executives from thebusiness world are some of our earlier participants in thisprogram. The Philippine Judicial Academy, through thecontinuing assistance of Ms. Annabelle Abaya, who, after beingPresidential Spokesman for then President Fidel V. Ramos, isnow our eloquent spokesperson, trainor and consultant of thegospel of Mediation, aim to reach about 400 mediators beforethe end of February 2001. All of these 400 mediators will besent to the courts in Metro Manila, Davao and Cebu Cities,and we are hoping to include some courts in other judicialregions during the Settlement Weeks starting March 26 andending April 6, 2001.

The Amicable Settlement Weeks Project is one of aboutfifty (50) activities celebrating the Centenary year of theSupreme Court. During the Settlement Weeks, an administrativeorder will be issued whereby courts will be directed to transferto these trained mediators cases in court dockets such as civilcases involving members of the same family except those which,by law, cannot be the subject of compromise; collection casesbased on creditor and debtor relationship; claims for civildamages; disputes arising out of lessor-lessee tenant relationshipand other types of civil cases which stand a good chance ofbeing settled given the application of the skills of our trainedmediators.

The results we have been receiving from our mediators arevery encouraging. We have invited you, ladies and gentlemen,key leaders in your communities and work places, to share withyou this alternative and effective mode of resolving disputesand what the Supreme Court is doing along this area, which is


to provide speedy and inexpensive dispensation of justice, thevery vision of our Chief Justice, the Honorable Hilario G.Davide, Jr.

Included in the project is the development of mediationadvocates among the Bench and the Bar and among other groupsin our society, which will culminate in the Amicable SettlementWeeks from March 26 to April 6, and the launching of thePhilippine Mediation Center, hopefully, on April 6, 2001.

TTTTThe Fhe Fhe Fhe Fhe Facilitatiacilitatiacilitatiacilitatiacilitativvvvve Nature Nature Nature Nature Nature ofe ofe ofe ofe of Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation∗

Judge Adriano R. Osorio (ret.)∗ ∗

We heard from the previous speakers that mediation is to bringthe contending parties in a civil case together in order to reacha fair and equitable resolution of their dispute with the help ofa neutral third party – The Mediator.

Aware of the heavy load of courts and to test the conclusionthat mediation is a speedy, inexpensive and simplified mode ofdispute resolution, the Supreme Court, in coordination withthe Philippine Judicial Academy, put mediation in actual testsometime in April 1999, and selected as pilot areas the citiesof Mandaluyong and Valenzuela. The City of Valenzuela, whereI am Executive Judge, has a population of a little less than500,000 and about 3,000 factories and business establishmentson a land area of 47 square kilometers.

With only three (3) RTCs and two (2) Metro TCs, onecan just imagine the number of cases that come in each daythat is beyond the human capability of the Judge to handle.This, I believe, is the reason why the courts of the City ofValenzuela were selected as pilot areas for mediation.

∗ Delivered at the Advocates Forums for Judges and for Lawyers, held respectivelyon February 1 and 2, 2001, at the Metropolitan Club, Makati City.

∗∗ Judge Adriano R. Osorio is formerly Executive Judge of RTC Br. 71, Valenzuela City.


In May 1999, the judges in the RTC and Metro TC ofValenzuela were asked to submit the list of prosepectivemediators. Who can be mediators?

1. One of known probity

2. Patient

3. Impartial/fair

4. Understanding

5. Approachable

On June 25 to 27, 1999, the Court recommended mediatorswho attended the seminar and workshop in Subic, OlongapoCity, conducted by the Supreme Court, PHILJA, SC-UNDPTechnical Assistance to the Philippine Judiciary on Justice andDevelopment, and PhilExport-TAPS. From December 15,1999 to February 29, 2000, actual mediation, albeit still a pilottest, started in the courts of Valenzuela.

All civil cases before judgment, whether before pre-trial,during pre-trial, or the hearing on merits, may be referred tomediation as long as the parties indicate their intention toamicably settle their dispute.

Under the 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure, particularlySection 6 of Rule 10, the pre-trial brief is required to containa statement of the parties’ willingness to enter into amicablesettlement or alternative modes of dispute resolution, and anindication of their desired terms. This serves as authority tothe court to refer the case to mediation.

532002] THE FACILITATIVE NATURE OF MEDIATION

To obtain the conformity of the parties during mediation,the Judge may call the parties to a conference without theircounsels; but the parties may request to be assisted by theircounsels.

At the conference, the Judge shall encourage the parties tosubmit their dispute to mediation; explain to them the benefitsof the early resolution of their cases, such as much less expensescompared to a long litigation; maintain and restore thefriendship or good relation of the parties, thereby saving timeand effort of the parties.

Once the parties are convinced of the benefits of mediationand have expressed their intention to settle the dispute, theJudge will issue an order referring the case for mediation,enlisting the help of mediators furnished by the Supreme Court.

Mediation in the Philippines is facilitative in nature, andnot evaluative.

It is facilitative in the sense that the Mediator is neither toinquire on the proof or evidence of either party nor make aruling on any issue. Their only function is to bring the partiesto a fair and equitable settlement of their dispute.

The proof or evidence, admission and other papers,documents or statements gathered during the mediationproceedings are confidential and cannot be used against theparty. An offer of compromise is neither an admission ofliability nor is it acceptable as evidence against the offeror.


The following are some observations during the pilot-testingof Mediation in Valenzuela City:

1. Some of the parties come to mediation not really tomediate, but to express their respective complaints.

2. Some parties would use mediation just to know theoffer of the other party.

3. Some lawyers and parties question the authority of theJudge to refer the case for mediation as well as theauthority and capability of the mediator.

4. There is lack of facility for mediation such as privaterooms where the parties can freely talk. There must bea friendly environment or healthy atmosphere to inducethe parties to come into settlement of their dispute/case.

5. There is no fixed place or room where mediation isconducted.

6. Some litigants and lawyers are not well informed aboutthis alternative mode of dispute resolution. There aresome who are of the opinion that mediation is just aduplication of the conciliation made before theKatarungang Pambarangay and that it is but a tactic ofthe Judge to delay the termination of a case which favorsone litigant.

7. There was one instance, in the early stages of pilottesting of mediation, where a lawyer filed a petition toinhibit the judge for referring the case for mediation,which delayed the termination of the case.

552002] THE FACILITATIVE NATURE OF MEDIATION

8. There are some litigants and lawyers who believe thatmediation is additional burden or expense on the parties.

9. There is a need for judges to be supportive andcooperative.

Mediation is now adopted in most countries in the world.Yours truly was lucky to be selected as one of the eight (8)participants in the Australia-Philippines Judicial CooperationProject held in Sydney, Australia last March 2000.

In Australia, mediation has long been part of the judicialsystem to help the parties settle their disputes rather than go totrial. Mediation is held upon the application of both partiesor upon the order of the court of both parties who agreed toput their case forward for mediation. There are private orprofessional mediators whose compensation or professional feeis paid per hour of service, to be paid equally by the parties.When the parties cannot afford the fee of the private mediator,the Court designates the Registrar to conduct the mediation.The Registrar is equivalent to our Clerk of Court, but is notpaid for his/her services since s/he already receives salary fromthe State. Mediation is gaining acceptance by the Australianpublic and the lawyers as an effective mode of dispute resolution.Its success depends not only on the cooperation of lawyers,but also on the support of judges.

Let us join our efforts to make mediation a successful andeffective mode of dispute resolution to ease the heavily cloggeddockets of our courts.

Mediation and Consensual DemocracMediation and Consensual DemocracMediation and Consensual DemocracMediation and Consensual DemocracMediation and Consensual Democracyyyyy∗∗∗∗∗

President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo

Let me begin first by expressing my warmest felicitations tothe mother institution of the Philippine Judicial Academy, theSupreme Court of the Philippines, on its Centenary YearCelebrations. As we gather here today, I would like to paytribute once again to this great institution, great especially underthe stewardship of the Filipino of the year, Chief Justice HilarioG. Davide, Jr.. I congratulate the Supreme Court for maintainingthe highest integrity in the historic impeachment trial anddecisively upholding what has been decided by the people’s courtat EDSA.

Today, we are witnesses to a significant project of theCentenary Celebrations of the Supreme Court - the launchingof the use of mediation in the courts. Although mediation isan old method, its rise to new heights of recognition as a modernhope of untangling conflicts is a result of the emergence ofnew democracies.

People have sounded the alarm against authoritarian ruleand disapproved of decision-making processes that ignore theparticipative role in governance. And we have clearlydemonstrated the lesson to the world - not once, but twice inEDSA I and EDSA II - that a government without genuineopportunity for decision-making and participation can neverbe called free.

∗ Delivered at the Mediation Conference and Workshop, on March 21, 2001, atthe Manila Hotel.

572002] MEDIATION AND CONSENSUAL DEMOCRACY

As we rebuild our country from the ashes of discord, wemust take into account our people’s diverse and polarizedinterest without the permanent wounds of enmity.

Solutions must be reached, not through loud voices anddebate, but respectful dialogue and consultation. We mustbalance advocacy and inquiry. This balance means clearly statingwhat we think while opening our minds to other options.

It is not easy to choose dialogue and consultation. It iseasier to advocate fiercely, to defend a position, to act as ifwhat we say is always right because we do not want ourcredibility, integrity, position, comfort and power threatened.

Good governance though, as our recent experience taughtus, is not an exclusive duty of government. It must include allsectors as I have articulated many times even when I was stillVice-President. We must create structures to institutionalizethe process of consultation and dialogue. As children of PeoplePower, our administration must reflect the sovereign will ofthe people.

And so, if we are to continue to live the Spirit of EDSA,we must persevere in nurturing our consensual democracy. Wemust learn to live together, recognizing our different means,hearing our different voices and integrating them in the life ofour shared values as a people.

Consensus does not mean that we all agree. Rather, it istaking the time to hear each other out, to understand while othersthink differently, and then acting together despite our diversity.Mediation comes with our renewed consensual democracy.


As we seek to reform our political and social structuresunder the visionary leadership of Chief Justice Davide, theJudiciary has embarked on its own judicial reform program.The appalling number of pending cases in the first two levelsof the Judiciary, reported at close to a million cases, is finallyconfronted by the bull horn with the progressive and proactivestance of the leadership of the Supreme Court.

The use of mediation in the courts ushers in a new era inour country where justice is more accessible, swifter and lessexpensive. Mediation will introduce our people to the value oftalking things over and of taking responsibility over decisionsthat will end their disputes.

From a national perspective, a Judiciary, with its uncloggeddockets, is a more efficient instrument of democracy as it balancesopposing interests or demolishes structures of oppression andinequity. Our judges will have more time to deliberate over moreserious issues that affect the lives of a greater majority of people.

For example, it is disheartening to know that our courtshave been reduced to collection agents of industries; B.P. 22 orthe Bouncing Check Law constitutes 65% of all cases filed inour courts. And yet, I understand that cases involving sums ofmoney are the easiest to mediate. Perhaps this is because filingcases seems to be a major reaction instead of a result ofdeliberate efforts to talk things over.

What we need to do is to take the cue from the ChiefJustice to simultaneously introduce settlement mechanisms suchas mediation to the courts while encouraging its use even inother arenas to effectively divert cases from the courts.

592002] MEDIATION AND CONSENSUAL DEMOCRACY

We must, likewise, encourage business and organizationsto include mediation in their dispute resolution system to arrestconflicts and grievances at the roots. We must provide laborand management non-adversarial mechanisms to arrive atcollective bargaining agreements through better techniques ofharmonizing their interests.

In the same vein, we must act concertedly in introducingmediation in our frontline services and quasi-judicial agenciesto ensure that cases are settled quickly and decisively, endingthe trend of endless appeals in the courts.

EDSA I and EDSA II taught us the possibility of peacefulresolution of conflicts. This is the spirit of mediation: thatopposing parties need not engage in bloody confrontation sincepeaceful, rationally settled conflicts result in enduring solutions.

Thus, I congratulate the Chief Justice and the SupremeCourt for embarking on this most innovative reform measurethat uses mediation. The creative approach of bringing to thepresent what has worked in the past, but imbuing it with newtechniques, is what makes for its more successful formula.

I also congratulate Chancellor Ameurfina Herrera and thePhilippine Judicial Academy for pursuing with vigor the initialsteps in applying mediation in our courts through the newly-trained 350 mediators who will tirelessly help people in theirconflicts and transform their relationships. Most significantly,I encourage our people to mediate even at the barangay levelbefore they litigate.


Finally, let me express the solidarity of the Executive branchof government and the Judiciary in developing the integrateduse mediation in all areas where it is applicable.

Once again, the Supreme Court is showing its leadership.Once again, let us ask the Lord to bless the Supreme Court andthe Philippines. CONGRATULATIONS!

Maraming salamat sa inyong lahat.

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION, , , , , BBBBBAAAAAYYYYYANIHANANIHANANIHANANIHANANIHAN ANDANDANDANDAND

THETHETHETHETHE BBBBBARANGAARANGAARANGAARANGAARANGAYYYYY J J J J JUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICE S S S S SYYYYYSTEMSTEMSTEMSTEMSTEM

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION: : : : : TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTTTTT’’’’’SSSSS P P P P PARARARARARTNERTNERTNERTNERTNER FORFORFORFORFOR J J J J JUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICE

INININININ THETHETHETHETHE N N N N NEWEWEWEWEW M M M M MILLENNIUMILLENNIUMILLENNIUMILLENNIUMILLENNIUM

CHIEF JUSTICE HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR.MEDIATION CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOP,

MARCH 21, 2001MANILA HOTEL

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION INININININ THETHETHETHETHE C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTSTSTSTSTS ANDANDANDANDAND THETHETHETHETHE B B B B BARANGAARANGAARANGAARANGAARANGAYYYYY J J J J JUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICEUSTICE S S S S SYYYYYSTEMSTEMSTEMSTEMSTEM

JUSTICE ANTONIO M. MARTINEZ (RET.)PHILIPPINE-JAPAN JOINT SEMINAR ON CRIME PREVENTION

AND TREATMENT OF OFFENDERS

DECEMBER 8, 2001MANILA HOTEL

Mediation: Mediation: Mediation: Mediation: Mediation: TTTTThe Courhe Courhe Courhe Courhe Court’t’t’t’t’s Ps Ps Ps Ps Pararararartner ftner ftner ftner ftner forororororJJJJJustice in the New Millenniumustice in the New Millenniumustice in the New Millenniumustice in the New Millenniumustice in the New Millennium∗∗∗∗∗

Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr.

Mme. Chancellor Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera;PHILJA Vice-Chancellor Justice Antonio Martinez; ActingCourt of Appeals Presiding Justice Garcia; Retired Court ofAppeals Justice Guingona; Acting Court AdministratorElepaño; DCA Suarez; Mr. Ryan of USAID; Mr. Tritt andAtty. Mercado of The Asia Foundation; Ms. Abaya; Presentors,resource speakers, reporters and participants in this MediationConference and Workshop; Guest; Ladies and Gentlemen:

Good Afternoon.

You will at once notice that two of the three heads of themain organs of the Philippine Government keynoted this event.This morning you had the Chief Executive of the Republic.Now, you have the Chief Justice. Again, if you also noticed,the keynote address of the Chief Justice comes at the end ofthe conference. This is the first time that a keynote comes atthe end. You see, I had a mediation session with Justice Martinezon this issue and in less than one minute, we were able to resolvethe matter.

When we recall that one of the founding fathers of theAmerican Constitution, James Madison, said that the end of

* Delivered at the Mediation Conference and Workshop, on March 21,2001, at the Manila Hotel.

632002] MEDIATION: THE COURT’S PARTNER FORJUSTICE IN THE NEW MILLENNIUM

the government is justice, we realize that mediation does, indeed,merit the support of the whole government, for the outcomeof mediation is nothing less than justice. In any case, therepresentation of two-thirds of the Philippine government inthis activity emphasizes the significant impact that mediationpromises for society.

For the Supreme Court and the rest of the Judiciary,mediation has the potential of diminishing the caseload oftrial courts. This single development initiates a chain of eventsthat leads to quality justice for all Filipinos. The reduction ofthe caseload of judges, by any degree, provides them breathingspace within which to improve their work and their skills. Inturn, this leads to a more thorough deliberation of cases and,consequently, to the improvement of the quality decisions likelyto be acceptable to all disputants. At the same time, it willpromote the trust and confidence of the public in the judicialsystem.

At that stage, justice has already been achieved for the partiesinvolved. The satisfactory resolution of disputes at the level ofthe trial courts assists higher courts in their work as well. Withfewer cases appealed to the Court of Appeals or the SupremeCourt, the Justices gain the luxury of time afforded to judgesthrough mediation, and the cycle of quality justice begins anewat this higher level.

For the Filipino society, mediation rekindles the culture ofneighborliness and the spirit of bayanihan that used to pervadethe Filipino way of life. Mediation relies on the goodwill ofthe parties involved in a dispute to arrive at a mutually acceptablesolution from their opponent’s perspective. In this sense, each


party helps the other as if the other’s problem were his or herown to bear. It vivifies a spirit of cooperation and solidarity,which is the cornerstone of a society’s foundation for peace,progress and prosperity.

This return to Philippine tradition departs from thelitigious or contentious instinct which Filipinos have apparentlyadopted after seeing so many foreign television shows whichglamorize the most insignificant court cases. Indeed,Hollywood tends to make a mountain out of a molehill becausecircumstances out of the ordinary often attract the greatestinterest and the most profit. Ironically, in real life, manyAmericans actually prefer to resolve their cases through variousforms of mediation.

It is high time that we not only embrace the more positiveaspects of American court culture, but also build upon ourown traditions to create a Filipino judicial philosophy that seeksto end disputes with the least burden in terms of time, moneyand emotion, and with the most just resolution while, at thesame time, promoting the Filipino bayanihan spirit. The timeis ripe for mediation. Parenthetically, Mr. Ryan mentioned thebarangay justice system. This system, if further promoted andstrengthened, would go hand and hand with mediation, a longway in considerably reducing the number of cases that wouldreach the court. USAID and The Asia Foundation have beenhelping the country in strengthening the barangay justice system.Through the Gerry Roxas Foundation, they are promoting thework of the barangay justice advocates.

Recognizing its potential impact, the Supreme Court went sofar as to include mediation in the Action Program for Judicial

652002] MEDIATION: THE COURT’S PARTNER FORJUSTICE IN THE NEW MILLENNIUM

Reform, the Court’s strategy for the sweeping improvement of theJudiciary. It is, therefore, an integral part of the ideal Judiciary,where justice is delivered swiftly and efficiently.

In order to build the Judiciary’s capability for mediation,the Philippine Judicial Academy undertook the training ofmediators from all over the country. This activity alone woulddemonstrate the Filipino’s inclination for mediation, as peoplefrom all walks of life - law graduates, policemen, civil servantsand others – came to improve themselves as mediators.

A series of Advocates Forum were also held to generate interestin and support for the Judiciary’s mediation-related activities.

In spite of the amount of work already done regardingmediation, today’s event does not signify an end. Indeed, we,in the Judiciary, through the efforts of the Philippine JudicialAcademy, have just begun building up momentum for the majoractivities ahead.

From 26 March to 6 April 2001, we will conduct SettlementWeeks, a massive campaign to showcase the benefits ofmediation. In this regard, cases referred for mediation byselected courts in Manila, Cebu and Davao Cities will undergomediated resolution with the help of some four hundred (400)mediators previously trained by PHILJA. We hope that theexpected positive impact from this activity will encouragelitigants to give mediation a serious try.

We also aim for mediation to be a self-sustaining andperpetual initiative for the Judiciary. To this end, a PhilippineMediation Center will be launched in this first week of April


2001. The Center will, among other goals, train new mediators,promote the use of court-referred mediation, and providemediation services for court-referred cases.

Thus, by the time the Judiciary celebrates the centennial ofthe Supreme Court on 11 June 2001, several initiatives will beadded to the long list of the Judiciary’s contributions to society.But we do not intend to celebrate the Supreme Court’s centenaryby merely reviewing past achievements. Rather, we will alsocommemorate our hundredth year with an eye to the future.We see mediation as one of the many ways to address thechallenges of this new millennium. The support of everyonehere will ensure that mediation shall live up to its potentials.

Our vision is of a Judiciary that is independent, effectiveand efficient, and worthy of public trust and confidence. Ithank everyone responsible for this afternoon’s activity – thePhilippine Judicial Academy; its consultants, Dean Eduardode los Angeles and Miss Annabelle Abaya; USAID; The AsiaFoundation; and most especially, everyone else here today whohave come to learn more about mediation and to support itsoperation. You have all made significant contributions towardthe fulfillment of the Judiciary’s vision. For your efforts, theentire nation, not just the Supreme Court or the PhilippineJudiciary, is truly grateful. You are now a part of the Judiciary.

I hope that your work in support of mediation will neverfalter. In so doing, you would be peacemakers. May God blesseach and everyone of us in our quest for justice.

Thank you all, and good afternoon.

Mediation in the CourMediation in the CourMediation in the CourMediation in the CourMediation in the Courts andts andts andts andts andTTTTThe he he he he BarangBarangBarangBarangBarangaaaaayyyyy J J J J Justice Systemustice Systemustice Systemustice Systemustice System∗∗∗∗∗

JJJJJustice Antonio M. Marustice Antonio M. Marustice Antonio M. Marustice Antonio M. Marustice Antonio M. Martinetinetinetinetinez (rz (rz (rz (rz (ret.)et.)et.)et.)et.)∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗

INTRODUCTION

I. MEDIATION IN COURTS

A. The Problem of Clogged DocketsB. The SolutionC. Mediation and its AdvantagesD. The Supreme Court’s Mediation Project

II. THE BARANGAY JUSTICE SYSTEM

A. JurisdictionB. ProceedingsC. AdvantagesD. Challenges

CONCLUSION

INTRODUCTION

It is my privilege and honor to address this assemblage on theoccasion of the Philippine-Japan Joint Seminar on CrimePrevention and Treatment of Offenders. I welcome the membersof the Judiciary, the prosecution service, the corrections office,law enforcement agency, community pillars and other membersof the executive department. Your presence here reveals yourinterest in trying to solve the problems which involve thecommunity. Your attendance here signals your willingness to

∗ Delivered at the Philippine-Japan Joint Seminar on Crime Prevention andTreatment of Offenders, on December 8, 2001, at the Manila Hotel.

∗∗ Justice Antonio M. Martinez (ret.) is currently the Vice-Chancellor of PHILJA.


dialogue with us and to assist us on how to promote mediationin the Philippines.

I shall divide my presentation into two parts:

The first shall deal with mediation in courts, and the secondshall dwell on the Barangay Justice System

I. MEDIATION IN COURTS

A. The Problem of Clogged DocketsI shall first discuss mediation in courts. I have been in theJudiciary for more than 27 years: I was a trial judge for fifteen(15) years, an Associate Justice in the Court of Appeals (CA)for eleven (11) years and in the Supreme Court (SC) for one-and-a-half (1 ½) years. As a trial judge, I heard fellow judgescomplain about the seeming endless number of cases filed incourt. Then, I heard litigants grumble relative to the delay inthe resolution of their cases because of the limited time allottedto each case. As a trial judge, I used to calendar only 4 or 5cases a day, allotting each case 30 to 45 minutes. As a result, itusually takes 1 to 2 years to decide a simple collection orejectment proceeding. This does not even include the protractedappeal which, like night following day, usually is resorted to bythe parties from an adverse decision. An appeal to the CAtakes time, considering the voluminous records which need tobe forwarded to the appellate court. On the average, it takesabout 3 to 4 years before the case is decided at that level. Then,some of the parties still appeal the decision of the CA to theSC. Thus, some cases take 15 to 20 years before these arefinally resolved.

692002] MEDIATION IN THE COURTS AND THEBARANGAY JUSTICE SYSTEM

According to the Office of the Court Administrator,coming into the year 2000, there were 801,625 pending casesin the First and Second Level Courts.

As of June 2001, the total number of cases pending in theRTC, MTC, MTCC, and MCTC totalled 797,721.

While the number of pending cases decreased, this doesnot include the numerous petitions pending in theSandiganbayan, Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.

There are only 1,124 First Level Courts and 950 SecondLevel Courts throughout the country. About 39% of the FirstLevel Courts and 25% of the Second Level Courts are vacant.

With this ever increasing number of cases, the highlytechnical rules and the spiralling number of complaints beingfiled, there is simply no way for the Judiciary to reduce itsbacklog even if we double or triple the number of judges.Indeed, even if the First and Second Level courts adjudgedmore cases, losing parties will still appeal the decision to theCA and the SC.

Clogged dockets and long drawn out litigation have beenthe headache of the justice system in the Philippines for a longtime now.

It is not fair to lay the blame on the judges and the courtsalone, for many of the members of the Bench, as a matter offact, most of its members, are able to decide cases expeditiously.But considering our adversarial system, there will always bepending cases.

B. The SolutionThe solution: to increasingly explore measures to minimize theproblem.


In 1997, the SC revised the Rules of Court so that duringpre-trial, the courts shall have the option not only to refer casesto arbitration (Sec. 1, Rule 20, Old Rules) but also to othermodes of alternative dispute resolution (Sec. 2, Rule 18, 1987Rules). Thus, PHILJA embarked on the novel project of court-referred mediation. The purpose was three-fold: (1) to improveaccess to justice; (2) to provide litigants with quick and fairprocesses for the resolution of their disputes for mediation;and (3) to assist the courts in declogging their dockets.

The basis for mediation is found in Par 5, Sec. 5, Art. 8 ofthe 1987 Constitution which mandates that the SC shallpromulgate rules that shall provide a simplified and inexpensiveprocedure for the disposition of cases. Then, there is also Sec.2(a), Rule 18 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended,which requires courts to “consider the possibility of an amicablesettlement or of a submission to alternative modes of disputeresolution.”

C. Mediation and its Advantages

Mediation is a process of resolving disputes with the aid of aneutral person – the mediator- who helps parties identify issuesand develop proposals to resolve their disputes. Unlikearbitration, the mediator is not empowered to decide disputes.

To my mind, mediation is successful because:

First, it is informal and non-confrontational. It leads tothe building of rapport between the parties. As a result, theparties are more willing to explore different options withoutprejudice to their cases.

Second, mediation offers solution at a significantly lowercost and in a shorter time.


Third, unlike litigation or arbitration which are oftencharacterized by a “winner takes all” outcome, mediation isnot bound by the “zero sum” gain of adjudication. Parties arefree to explore the most noble or creative way of resolving theirproblem and need not be bound to the legal definition of theirdispute.

Fourth, because in mediation, the parties will work togetherto merit an agreement, they will likely be more committed toabide by its term of settlement. A solution structured by theparties themselves is likely to be more satisfactory and enduringthan one that is imposed by a third party.

Fifth, mediation preserves the relationship between theparties. And,

Sixth, most importantly, once the parties reach acompromise that is approved by the court, the dispute ends.There is no more appeal.

D. The Supreme Court’s Mediation Project

In the Philippines mediation went through a cautiously gradualevolution. The Supreme Court’s Mediation Project is acomponent of its comprehensive judicial reform program. In1999, PHILJA, the educational arm of the Supreme Court,conducted the first seminar workshop for prospective mediatorsunder the Supreme Court - United Nations DevelopmentProgram (SC-UNDP). This was followed by field training orinternship in selected courts in Metro Manila. The successrate or cases settled was 42% of settled cases. Encouraged bythe results, in July 2000, there was another follow-up projectwherein we concentrated on Family Courts. We solicited theassistance of the Singapore Mediation Center in the training


of prospective mediators. This time, the pilot courts were inMandaluyong, Pasay and Quezon Cities. The internshipprogram yielded a success rate of 84%.

Thereafter we trained additional mediators in MetroManila, and Cebu and Davao Cities. They underwent a two-day basic seminar workshop, a month-long internship program,and refresher courses under the tutelage of our mediatorconsultant, Ms. Annabelle T. Abaya, and the guidance of DeanEduardo de los Angeles, Chairman of the PHILJA Sub-committee on ADR. At present, we have more than 400accredited mediators.

The basic seminar workshop is a two-day activity designedto train mediators. The first day consists of lectures on thenature of conflicts, goals and expectations, resolving conflicts(negotiation, mediation, arbitration and litigation), interest-based negotiation, introduction to mediation and the processof mediation. The second day focuses on the tools of mediators,controlling, problem solving, special challenges to a mediator,breaking an impasse and writing an agreement. Similar to thefirst day, the second day is loaded with exercises after everylecture.

After the basic seminar workshop, the mediators undergoan intensive internship program. Each mediator is assigned atleast one case to be resolved within four (4) weeks. The casesreferred by the trial court are based on the guidelines onmediation approved by the SC on November 16, 1999, whichalso provided for the rules of procedure in the conduct ofmediation proceedings. The mediators then will apply the skillsof mediation and try to work out a settlement in each of hisassigned cases.


The trial court plays an important role in the internshipprogram. It is responsible for the inventory, preparation andreferral of cases for mediation. Notices/orders are preparedby the Branch Clerks of Court, duly signed by the judges, andsent at least one (1) month prior to the scheduled mediationproceedings.

One of the most important aspects of a successfulinternship program or actual mediation proceeding is propercoordination which requires meetings with the judges andpersonnel of the trial courts concerned. There must be aninventory of cases for mediation, preparation and deliveries ofnotices/orders, setting up of the schedule of mediation, andproper reporting of the results of mediation.

PHILJA always requests the Executive Judge of the trialcourt or the Mayor in each area to provide a room for mediation.PHILJA meets with these officials to explain the details of themediation project and to stimulate their interest in mediation.

The rooms that are provided varies depending on theavailable rooms in each area. Courtrooms, Executive Judge’slounge, Mayor’s conference hall, RTC libraries and chambersare all utilized.

A total of fourteen (14) internship programs were completed:ten (10) in Manila, two (2) in Cebu City, and two (2) in DavaoCity from November 20, 2000 to February 23, 2001.

We found the internship program to be successful. Thenumber of cases successfully mediated totalled 77%.

Thereafter, we require the mediators to undergo refreshercourses. The purpose of this activity is to update the trainedmediators on their skills and knowledge of mediation. This beganon November 28, 2000 and ended on March 20, 2001.


Thereafter, the PHILJA also conducted the AdvocatesForum. The purpose of the forum was to introducestakeholders to the concept and benefits of mediation; todevelop support in the use of mediation in the Philippines;and to clarify doubts and questions and allay fears andapprehensions on mediation.

With the ultimate objective of informing the public ofmediation, it was critical that participants of the forum representall sectors of society that may get involved in mediation. Weconducted various forums in Metro Manila, Cebu and DavaoCities for the period covering January 19, 2001 up to and untilMarch 16, 2001. Here, we met with judges, lawyers, businessgroups, the government sector, the academe, non-governmentalorganizations and media. All in all, we held eight (8) forumsinvolving all stakeholders.

Then, on March 21, 2001, the PHILJA conducted aMediation Conference and Workshop. The purpose of thisworkshop and conference was to secure the stakeholders’ inputson policy issues such as certification and maintenance ofmediator competencies, professional fees, quality assurance,training standards, code of ethics and legislation. Gracing thisactivity was President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and the ChiefJustice who were both keynote speakers during the dialogue.Among those invited to the conference and workshop werejustices of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals andSandiganbayan, senior officials of the SC, retired SC justices,funders, members of the Academic Council, the PHILJA Corpof Professors, deans of law schools, mediators and media.

A total of 325 attended the conference workshop whichhad topics such as the following:


a. Unclogging the court dockets;

b. Accomodating mediation in the Rules of Court;

c. Legislation of mediation;

d. Standards of Training and Competence, Accreditation;

e. Code of Ethics for Mediation;

f. Mediators Compensation; and

g. Developing New Applications of Mediation.

And, finally, to pilot test and implement mediation, we held“Settlement Weeks.” The Settlement Weeks Project was thefinal activity in the implementation of the Initial MediationProject of the Academy. The period from March 26 to April6, 2001 was declared as the Amicable Settlement Weeks by theChief Justice. It included all RTCs and MTCs in Metro Manilaand in the cities of Cebu and Davao and their neighboringtowns. Judges were instructed to audit at least twenty (20)cases in their dockets which may be referred for mediation.

The courts were further enjoined to follow the guidelinesin implementing the activities, namely:

a. To schedule at least two (2) cases each day in themorning and in the afternoon for the duration of theactivity;

b. To follow-up closely the issuance and delivery of theorders so as to give the parties ample time to appearand to prepare for the mediation proceeding;

c. To assign a suitable place in which both parties as wellas the mediator can meet with regard to the nature ofthe case.


A total of 300 Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan TrialCourts, and Municipal Trial Courts in Metro Manila (244), Cebu(35) and Davao (30) Cities participated in the Settlement Weeks.A total of 335 mediators and 20 supervisors also participated.

The result of the Settlement Weeks is very encouraging.The cases mediated totalled 1,816, those settled 1,469, andfailed mediation amounted to 347. We had an over-all successrate of 84%.

The type of cases referred for mediation were:

a. Sum of Money;

b. Lessor-Lessee Relationship;

c. Family Disputes;

d. Estate Proceedings;

e. Damages;

f. Rescission of Contract;

g. Specific Performance;

h. Ejectment;

i. Replevin;

j. Injunction;

k. BP 22;

l. Recovery of Possession; and

m. Nullity of Contract.


II. THE BARANGAY JUSTICE SYSTEM

At this juncture, I would like to devote the remaining time bydescribing the complementary role of the Barangay JusticeSystem in getting the community involved in the resolution ofdisputes through non-judicial modes.

The Philippines can boast of having a rich culturalbackground and tradition which includes the concept ofbarangays at the local level. When applied to dispute settlement,barangay justice, which is really of non-judicial character,provides a venue that is characteristically conciliatory. Thesystem has been designed in order to obtain a just, speedy, andinexpensive settlement of disputes. This also relieves the courtsof additional case load.

Barangay justice has been in place since 1978 through P.D.No. 1508 and subsequently, reinforced with the passage ofR.A. No. 7160 or the Local Government Code. Theadministration and implementation of the KatarungangPambarangay was devolved to the local government units(LGUs), specifically the Office of the City or Municipal Mayor.

A. Jurisdiction

The jurisdiction of the Katarungang Pambarangay covers alldisputes except:

a. Where one party is the government or any subdivisionor instrumentality thereof;

b. Where one party is a public officer or employee andthe dispute relates to the performance of his duties;

c. Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding oneyear or a fine exceeding P5,000;


d. Offenses where there is no private offended party;

e. Where the dispute involves real property located in differentcities or municipalities unless the parties agree to submittheir differences to amicable settlement by an appropriatelupon; and

f. Disputes involving parties residing in barangays ofdifferent cities or municipalities and the parties agreeto submit to amicable settlement by an appropriatelupon.

B. Proceedings

Parties who are unable to settle their dispute among themselvesthrough negotiation must bring their dispute (which falls underthe jurisdiction of the Katarungang Pambarangay) to thePunong Barangay to attempt at an amicable settlement prior tofiling their complaint before the court.

The Punong Barangay will, as directed by the parties, eithermediate or arbitrate the case. If no settlement is reached, thecase is referred to the Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo, a panel ofthree members of the Lupong Tagapamayapa, who canconciliate, mediate or arbitrate the case. If there is still nosettlement effected, then the Lupon Secretary or the PangkatSecretary (with the attestation by the Lupon or PangkatChairman) will issue a certificate to file an action in court, andthe party concerned may then file the appropriate complaintbefore the proper court.

C. Advantages

When utilized to its fullest potential, the process of amicablesettlement at the BARANGAY level can be empowering for the


community members. It also fosters harmony, peace and orderat the most basic institutional structure of government.

D. Challenges

Some existing challenges confronting the Barangay JusticeSystem may be worth looking into for the purpose of policyreform.

There is a need for community members to familiarizethemselves with the operations of the Barangay Justice System.More public campaign on the processes of the system may beworth pursuing.

In some of the regional consultations on the subject, manybarangay officials noted some inherent weaknesses of the Luponand the Pangkat. For instance, an observation has been madethat it may be essential to require the Lupon and Pangkatmembers to undergo a continuing education program to makethem aware of their roles, duties, and responsibilities, amongothers. It is also important to emphasize the acceptability ofthese members to the community, particularly in regard to theirimpartiality and integrity.

Other agencies of government and specialized bodies,including the Philippine Mediation Center, could assist theKatarungang Pambarangay through trainings of the Lupon andPangkat in negotiation, conciliation, and conflict management.

It will also be encouraging to cite the “success stories” ofKatarungang Pambarangay (for example, a barangay in LegaspiCity was adjudged winners in the Galing Pook Awards).

Today, initiatives at putting Barangay Councils for theProtection of Children (BCPCs) into operation have added anew dimension to the concept of barangay justice. This will


be another opportunity for the community to address the needsof one of the most vulnerable sectors of our society.

On a related matter concerning the role of the communityin assisting children facing the courts is the adoption of the NewRule on Examination of a Child Witness. This Rule applies tochildren who are victims of a crime, accused of a crime, andwitnesses to a crime. Community members may be tasked tohelp any of these children as a guardian ad litem, facilitator orsupport person in the course of the judicial proceedings.

CONCLUSION

To sum up, while direct community involvement in the courtsmay be limited on account of established rules of procedure,the ends of justice would be greatly enhanced by the vigilanceof the community members by complying with their duty tocooperate with the judges and court personnel in the course ofjudicial proceedings whenever required by the rules. The courtsmust be a repository of trust and integrity in order to realizean effective administration of justice.

Thank you.

PPPPPHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION C C C C CENTERENTERENTERENTERENTER

TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE I I I I INSTITUTIONNSTITUTIONNSTITUTIONNSTITUTIONNSTITUTIONALIZAALIZAALIZAALIZAALIZATIONTIONTIONTIONTION OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

JUSTICE AMEURFINA A. MELENCIO HERRERA (RET.)LAUNCHING OF THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER

APRIL 6, 2001TOP OF THE CITI, CITIBANK TOWERS, MAKATI CITY

TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE E E E E ESTSTSTSTSTABLISHMENTABLISHMENTABLISHMENTABLISHMENTABLISHMENT OFOFOFOFOF THETHETHETHETHE P P P P PHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION C C C C CENTERENTERENTERENTERENTER

DEAN REYNALDO L. SUAREZ

LAUNCHING OF THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER


TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE P P P P PHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION C C C C CENTERENTERENTERENTERENTER:::::PPPPPASTASTASTASTAST, P, P, P, P, PRESENTRESENTRESENTRESENTRESENT ANDANDANDANDAND F F F F FUTUREUTUREUTUREUTUREUTURE

DEAN EDUARDO DE LOS ANGELES



BBBBBUILDINGUILDINGUILDINGUILDINGUILDING C C C C CAPAPAPAPAPABILITYABILITYABILITYABILITYABILITY FORFORFORFORFOR M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

JUSTICE AMEURFINA A. MELENCIO HERRERA (RET.)ACCREDITATION CEREMONY FOR METRO MANILA MEDIATORS

NOVEMBER 9, 2001COURT OF APPEALS AUDITORIUM, MANILA

TTTTThe Institutionalization ofhe Institutionalization ofhe Institutionalization ofhe Institutionalization ofhe Institutionalization of Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation∗

Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera (ret.)∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗

It all started with a vision: the vision of eased court docketsand expeditious, non-adversarial disposition of cases.

It all started with a mission: the mission mandated by theSupreme Court to the Philippine Judicial Academy in 1997 “toconduct an in-depth examination of our present legal and judicialsystem for the purpose of upgrading, improving and reforming itto meet the changes in and challenges of the new millennium.”

It is this vision and this mission that started the PhilippineJudicial Academy (PHILJA) on the road to Mediation.

Clogged dockets and long drawn-out litigation have beenthe bane of the justice system in the Philippines for a long timenow.

It is not fair to lay the blame on the judges and the courtsalone for many of the members of the Bench do endeavor todecide and to resolve cases expeditiously. Then, too, consideringour adversarial system, there will always be pending cases. Thedesideratum is to unceasingly explore measures to minimizethe problem.

∗ Delivered at the Launching of the Philippine Mediation Center, on April 6,2001 at the Top of the Citi, Citibank Towers, Makati City.

∗∗ Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera (ret.) is the Chancellor of PHILJA.

832002] THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF MEDIATION

Thus, PHILJA embarked on the novel project of court-referred Mediation. The purpose is three-fold: a) to improveaccess to justice; b) to provide litigants with quick and fairprocesses for the resolution of their disputes through Mediation;and c) to assist the courts in de-clogging their dockets.

PHILJA went through a cautiously gradual process. In1999, we held the 1st Seminar-Workshop for ProspectiveMediators under the Supreme Court-United NationsDevelopment Program (UNDP). This was followed by pilotprojects in selected courts in Metro Manila, eventuallybranching out to Cebu and Davao. Encouraged by the results,we went on to train selected volunteer Mediators. They haveundergone basic seminar-workshops, internship programs, andrefresher courses under the intense tutelage of our MediationConsultant, Ms. Annabelle T. Abaya, and the painstakingguidance of Dean Eduardo de los Angeles, Chairman of thePHILJA Sub-committee on ADR.

We then conducted Advocates Forums for judges, lawyers,the academe, NGOs, and media. The purpose was to increasepublic awareness of the concept and advantages of mediation.

We have held a Mediation and Conference Workshop, alsogeared towards increasing public awareness and acceptance byall stakeholders in the administration of justice. We held theworkshops to provide a consultative and collaborative approachin gathering inputs for the development of policyrecommendations to be submitted to the Supreme Court. Thegoal is a broad-based consensus towards building this judicialreform initiative.


We completed today our Settlement Weeks which ran forten (10) days. The partial results will be presented to the ChiefJustice later in this program. For the cases referred to mediation,the percentage of success was around 80%. This has beenachieved despite the basic problems that loudly call for solution.I refer to the hesitation of litigants, the resistance of somelawyers, and the propensity to ask for postponements orresetting for one reason or another. That is the reason why, inspite of the cases selected by the Judges for mediation, manyhad to be referred back to the courts without the benefit ofmediation, while others had to be reset.

This emphasizes the need for a social attitude and acommunity disposition. I refer to the willingness andpreparedness to resolve disputes and controversies rationallywithout calling on the rather cumbersome and expensivemechanism of the formal judicial system. I refer also to the needfor the wisdom, understanding and cooperation of the membersof the Bar. There must be fostered in all a capacity and tolerancefor dialogue and the good nature to seek mediation in good faith.

We are now ready to move on to the next logical phase – toinstitutionalize Mediation as part of the justice system throughthe Philippine Mediation Center, which we are launching thisevening. This is the culminating step that will ensure thesustainability of the Mediation project. It will continue topromote the use of Mediation as an alternative to lengthy andcostly litigation.

The Philippine Mediation Center Foundation, Inc. (PMFI)has offered to provide the Academy technical assistance inaccomplishing the Academy’s objective to promote court-related

852002] THE INSTITUTIONALIZATION OF MEDIATION

Mediation and implement the pertinent provisions of the 1997Rules of Civil Procedure on alternative modes of disputeresolution.

We have, Mr. Chief Justice, pursued with vigor the initialsteps in applying mediation in our courts. Everything has beenon schedule, in line with your action plan for judicial reforms.

We publicly acknowledge the invaluable support andunflagging interest of our partners in judicial reforms and in theMediation Center. Under the umbrella of USAID, we have hadthe privilege of working hand-in-hand, sharing both travails andfulfillments, with The Asia Foundation, AGILE and PhilExport-TAPS. The success of these initial efforts is theirs as well.

The spade work has been done, but the real work has justbegun. We plant today the seed of the Philippine MediationCenter that will complement the functions of the courts. Wehave yet to see it grow and achieve efficiency in order to gaingreater acceptability of the Mediation process, thereby bringingjustice closer to our people and helping unburden our courts,including diverting cases from them.

For the honor and privilege of all your support in thispioneering judicial reform initiative - past, present, and future- please accept the Philippine Judicial Academy’s sincerestappreciation.

TTTTThe Estabhe Estabhe Estabhe Estabhe Establishment oflishment oflishment oflishment oflishment of the Philippine the Philippine the Philippine the Philippine the PhilippineMediation CenterMediation CenterMediation CenterMediation CenterMediation Center∗∗∗∗∗

Dean Reynaldo L. Suarez∗ ∗

Today formally ends the Amicable Settlement Weeks. It startedlast March 6 with all courts of both levels in the NationalCapital Judicial Region, Cebu and Davao participating. Eachof these courts were paired with one mediator trained by thePhilippine Judicial Academy. While Settlement Weeks hasended, mediation, it is hoped, will continue, for this alternativemode of conflict resolution has firmly established its roots inour courts and in the party litigants who have amicably settledtheir disputes.

We want to claim a modest success in our endeavor. Withwhat has been started, given more purposeful reflection,planning, organization and funding, the future of mediationlooks very bright indeed. I have no doubt in my mind thatcourt-referred mediation will provide a breakthrough in oursearch for a meaningful way of decongesting the dockets ofour courts.

From the time that we started training mediators, pilottesting the program in some designated courts, and conducting

∗ Delivered at the Launching of the Philippine Mediation Center, on April 6,2001, at Top of the Citi, Citibank Towers, Makati City.

∗∗ DCA Reynaldo L. Suarez (ret.) was formerly Executive Director of the JudicialReforms Committee of the Philippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA). He is nowDean of the University of the East College of Law.

872002] THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PHILIPPINEMEDIATION CENTER

advocates fora, conference workshops and the Settlement Weeks,we had local and foreign donors who kept faith in us and inour conviction that mediation is a viable mode of resolvingdisputes, sharing the vision of our Chief Justice that ifmediation has been proven successful in other countries, it, too,will work in our country.

As the Settlement Weeks end, the Philippine MediationCenter begins. This is a historical event for mediation because,for the first time in our country, a center rises with the sole aimof continuing a program which has been successfully begun. Itwill now institutionalize a program, hand in hand with thePhilippine Judicial Academy, as the Supreme Court’s educationalarm, that will provide an alternative mode to litigants, addressingtheir problems swifter, and in a non-adversarial and less costlymanner.

In behalf of the Philippine Judicial Academy, it is myprivilege to express our deep appreciation to our funders orfinancial donors: the USAID represented here in this gatheringby Mr. Robert Wurtz; the Asia Foundation, represented by Dr.Steven Rood; the Accelerating Growth, Investment andLiberalization with Equity, otherwise known as Agile,represented here by Atty. George Carmona; and PhilExport-TAPS, represented here by Atty. Rhodora Raterta. ThePhilippine Bar Association also extended their financial andmoral support. The last, but certainly not the least, to whichwe owe our appreciation is the Singapore Mediation Centerwho was the first to aid us with some of their expert trainors inour first training program.


Appreciation is not complete until we recognize with greatappreciation the efforts of our mediators who did an excellentjob. Some of the mediators whom I visited in the differentcourts during the Settlement Weeks skipped their meals just tonot miss the parties in the cases referred to them. Their skills,enthusiasm and dedication is reflective of the kind of trainingthey received from our consultant, Ms. Annabelle T. Abaya,who sat on pins and needles all through the two weeks that hadpassed.

And to all of you, friends, ladies and gentlemen, thank youfor coming.

TTTTThe Philippine Mediation Centerhe Philippine Mediation Centerhe Philippine Mediation Centerhe Philippine Mediation Centerhe Philippine Mediation Center:::::PPPPPast, Prast, Prast, Prast, Prast, Present and Futuresent and Futuresent and Futuresent and Futuresent and Futureeeee∗

Dean Eduardo de los Angeles∗∗

I. THE PAST

II. THE PRESENT

III. THE FUTURE

There is a Filipino saying that, “Ang taong hindi marunonglumingon sa pinanggalingan ay hindi makararating saparoroonan.” For this reason, I thought it prudent to chroniclethe history of the Philippine Mediation Center as we envisionits future role in our society. Let me then briefly narrate:

I. I. I. I. I. TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE P P P P PASTASTASTASTAST

In 1992, the Philippine Bar Association (PBA) embarkedin a project to promote alternative dispute resolution (ADR)in the country. This was impelled by the realization that: (a)court dockets were congested, and (b) the cost of justice hadbecome unaffordable for the greater number of our people.Instead of blaming the courts for delay, it was felt that thePBA would find practical ways of helping them along. As then

∗ Delivered at the Launching of the Philippine Mediation Center, on April 6,2001, at Top of the Citi, Citibank Towers, Makati City.

∗∗ Dean Eduardo de los Angeles is the President of the Philippine MediationFoundation, Inc. as well as the Chairperson of the ADR Sub-Committee,Consultants’ Group, Judicial Reforms Office, PHILJA.


Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) President MelvynEncanto said:

Bad Lawyers clog the court dockets with cases that shouldnot have been filed at all or which can be resolved throughsimple mediation. They waste the court’s time addressingtrivial issues. They serve as a dead weight on the judicialprocess, contributing immensely to the backlog of casesand to judicial inefficiency.

Thus, as a first step to promote ADR, the PBA held twoseminars to train prospective mediators and arbitrators. Thefirst was conducted by American professors: Leonard Riskin,Michael Keating and Charles Wiggins. They taught thirty (30)participants the skills and process of mediation. The secondwas directed by Australian lawyers: Brian Conrick and MichaelKlug who lectured to seventy (70) participants about arbitration.As I recall, inviting those foreign trainors – even at that time –was expensive and would not have been possible without thefinancial assistance of The Asia Foundation.

Thereafter, several members of the PBA including JusticeArtemio Panganiban, Justice Serafin Guingona, Deans AntionioAbad, Fortunato Gupit, Jr. and Custodio Parlade, and Attys.Ricardo Romulo, Al Flores and Manuel Ortega, organized theCouncil for Non-Court Resolution of Disputes (CONCORD)Foundation for the following purposes:

To promote and encourage the practice of mediation,arbitration and other modes of alternative disputeresolution, for the purpose of unclogging court docketsand improving the system of dispensing justice in thePhilippines;

912002] THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER:PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE

To provide instruction and training through non-formalmethods such as seminars, conferences and other activitiesfor lawyers, law students, paralegals and the public.

CONCORD Foundation then made a “Needs AssessmentReport on ADR in the Philippines” with the help of ChairmanAlfredo Tadiar, the Makati Business Club and the Accord Groupof Australia. Unfortunately, despite the finding of need, nodisputant sought out CONCORD Foundation to mediate anydispute. After years of inactivity, CONCORD Foundationbecame dormant.

Fortunately, in 1999, the Philippine Judicial Academydecided to create an ADR sub-committee composed of DeanPacifico Agabin, Chairman Alfredo Tadiar and myself to studyhow to implement the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure on court-referred mediation as an incident of pre-trial, with the supportof Chancellor Ameurfina Herrera and PhilExport-TAPS. Thesub-committee held a seminar workshop in Subic to train aboutforty (40) prospective mediators. Thereafter, the SupremeCourt authorized the pilot testing of mediation in the courtsof Valenzuela and Mandaluyong Cities. About 102 cases werereferred by the courts for mediation with a 41% success rate.

Encouraged by the moderate success of the first pilot test,Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. directed - (a) additionalseminar-workshops with Singaporean Trainors and US-trainedMs. Annabelle Abaya; and (b) the expansion of the Pilot Test Areato include Pasay, Makati, Manila and Quezon Cities (and later,Cebu and Davao Cities) where the success rate soared to 77%.

Let me say, at this point, that this success is largely due toyou, who form part of 375 newly, but very well trained andcommitted mediators.


As the number of mediators continued to increase, we feltthe urgent need to form an organization for them and a centerto provide facilities for mediation. Instead of forming a newcorporation, it was suggested that the Foundation be simplyrenamed the Philippine Mediation Center Foundation, Inc.

II. II. II. II. II. TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE P P P P PRESENTRESENTRESENTRESENTRESENT

With the concurrence of its board and members, CONCORDFoundation was renamed the Philippine Mediation CenterFoundation, Inc. (PMCFI) and, yesterday, the SEC approvedthe change of name. As we launch the center this afternoon, Iam happy to inform you that it will, by a letter-agreement,provide the Supreme Court and the Philippine Judicial Academytechnical assistance in the following areas:

1. The instruction and training under such terms andconditions mutually acceptable of mediators throughnon-formal methods such as seminars, conferences,workshops and internships;

2. The formulation of the standards of competence andqualifications for mediators who will handle appropriatecases referred by the courts for mediation. Indetermining the standards, it is expected that thePMCFI shall consult all stakeholders, programdesigners, administrators, educators, disputants, lawpractitioners, and judges;

3. The periodic review and revision, as needed, of theforegoing standards;

4. The assessment of mediators based on the aforesaidstandards and the making of written recommendations,if appropriate, for their accreditation by the Philippine

932002] THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER:PAST, PRESENT AND FUTURE

Judicial Academy and/or the Supreme Court. Indetermining the competence of mediators, PMCFI shallalso consider their natural aptitude as well as their skills,knowledge, creativity, effectiveness and other attributesacquired through training, education and experience;

5. The supervision of the mediators tasked to handle casesreferred by courts for mediation;

6. Supporting the Philippine Judicial Academy and/orthe Supreme Court in the Annual Settlement Week(s)Project, including the evaluation of such yearly project;and

7. The draft of a code of ethics for mediators for theapproval of the Supreme Court.

III. III. III. III. III. TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE F F F F FUTUREUTUREUTUREUTUREUTURE

It is our intention that the Philippine Mediation CenterFoundation, Inc. will be an umbrella organization for allmediators in the Philippines with chapters in every city. It willprincipally provide services for: (a) private mediation, and (b)court-referred mediation. For private mediation, theFoundation will have its own rules, accreditation and feestructure. However, for court-referred mediation, theFoundation will provide support services to the courts underrules, accreditation and fees promulgated by the Supreme Courtand/or the Philippine Judicial Academy. As a foundationorganized for its member mediators, it will provide supervisionand continued training and development for its member-mediators.


As a center, it will provide facilities for mediation services,a ready list of mediators and their areas of expertise forspecialized services, and administrative and secretarial supportfor all matters concerning mediation.

I therefore invite you to join the Philippine MediationCenter Foundation. Let us all help promote mediation in thePhilippines.

Building Capability fBuilding Capability fBuilding Capability fBuilding Capability fBuilding Capability for Mediationor Mediationor Mediationor Mediationor Mediation∗∗∗∗∗

JJJJJustice Ameurfustice Ameurfustice Ameurfustice Ameurfustice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herina A. Melencio Herina A. Melencio Herina A. Melencio Herina A. Melencio Herrrrrrera (rera (rera (rera (rera (ret.)et.)et.)et.)et.)∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗

PHILJA’s Mediation initiatives in its Initial Mediation Projectunderwent a gradual step by step process in the last two years.What was significant was that the pace never flagged. Thecompletion of one step only served to propel the beginning ofthe next.

We started with our Seminar-Workshop for ProspectiveMediators on June 25-27, 1999, at Subic, Olongapo City.

We then studied the necessary guidelines for theimplementation of mediation proceedings and submitted themto the Supreme Court for approval. On November 16, 1999,the Court issued the Amended Guidelines.

With guidelines in place, pilot projects testing the efficacyof mandatory mediation started on December 15, 1999 inselected courts in Mandaluyong and Valenzuela Cities,subsequently extending to courts in Pasay and Quezon Cities.Mediation conferences, to further test the process, werethereafter held during the last week of December 1999 to theend of February 2000.

∗ Delivered at the Accreditation Ceremony for Metro Manila Mediators, onNovember 9, 2001, at the Court of Appeals Auditorium, Manila

∗∗ Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera (ret.) is the Chancellor of PHILJA.


On January 21, 2000, we held a “Video-Tape Viewing ofMandatory Mediation on Pre-Trial” taken in Canada andpresented by DCA Zenaida Elepaño, who had attended a CJEICourt Administration and Management Program in Halifax,Nova Scotia.

On March 17, 2000, we asked Dr. David Matz of theGraduate Program in Dispute Resolution in the University ofMassachusetts in Boston, to lecture on Court-ReferredMediation. The objective was to introduce the concept ofMediation and its advantages to other Judges who were notincluded in the pilot projects. We met initial resistance as thejudges felt that Mediation was just an additional layer in thejudicial process, if not a threat to their authority.

Realizing the need for an awareness campaign, we conductedan Orientation Program on Mediation for Judges and CourtPersonnel in October 2000. The objective was to introduce tothem the theoretical and practical aspects of Mediation.

Subsequently, fourteen (14) training Seminars andWorkshops for Mediators were completed from November2000 to February 2001 in Metro Manila, Cebu and Davao.We have trained a total of 359 mediators out of the 1,000, orso, needed for a nationwide application.

The training strategy included basic Seminar-Workshops,Internship Programs in selected courts, Refresher Courses, aswell as Advocates Fora for judges, the Bar, the academe, theNGOs and the media. These extended up to March 2001.The purpose of the forums was to increase public awarenessof the concept and the advantages of Mediation.

972002] BUILDING CAPABILITY FOR MEDIATION

The forums reached a high point on March 21, 2001, whenwe held a Mediation Conference and Workshop at the ManilaHotel, with President Arroyo and Chief Justice Davide as ourGuests of Honor. The goal was to provide a consultative andcollaborative approach and a broad-based consensus towardsbuilding this judicial reform initiative. We were gratified tohear President Arroyo express the solidarity of the Executivebranch of the government with the Judiciary in developing theuse of mediation as a means of diverting cases from the courts,for PHILJA encourages other departments of government todevelop their own ADR programs. The Department of Justiceis already doing so.

Thereafter, as part of its Centennial celebrations, theSupreme Court authorized the conduct of Settlement Weeksin the courts of Metro Manila, Cebu and Davao, from March26 to April 6, 2001, to test the efficacy of Mediation. Withthe success rate reported at 85%, the Chief Justice announcedthat the mediation weeks showcased the power of mediation asa tool for achieving justice.

But the initiatives could not end there. Another step wasneeded – the institutionalization of Mediation as part of thejustice system through an organizational network. Foresightedly,the Chief Justice launched the Philippine Mediation Centeron April 6, 2001, which he globally called the “Peace forMankind Center.”

However, it was not until October 16, 2001 that the Courtformally established the Philippine Mediation Center throughan en banc Resolution. That Resolution has designated theAcademy as the component unit of the Supreme Court for


court-referred, court-related mediation cases and other formsof Alternative Dispute Resolution mechanisms.

The gap between April 6, the date of the launch of theCenter, and October 16, when the Center was formallyestablished, seemed interminably long, but a more wholisticapproach required other administrative structures to be studiedand put in place.

I know that our Mediators themselves, especially those fromCebu, were also showing a bit of impatience, but today we arehappy that all the Metro Manila Mediators will receive theirCertificates of Accreditation from the Chief Justice. Thosefrom Cebu and Davao Cities will follow.

For the success of our aggregate efforts in this InitialMediation Project, we thank all our volunteer Mediators for theirenthusiasm and dedication. We especially thank the Chief Justiceand the Supreme Court for having given this judicial reforminitiative their indispensable imprimatur. We thank our ADRSub-committee, our Lecturers, Facilitators, and the entire PHILJAcomplement for their individual and collective commitment.

Nor can we forget our partners in this effort. For havingpioneered with us, we reiterate our deepest appreciation to theSingapore Mediation Center, UNDP, USAID, The AsiaFoundation, AGILE, PhilExport-TAPS, and Ms. AnnabelleAbaya, our Consultant. They have been of invaluable assistancein building the country’s capability for mediation.

Today, therefore, we walk again into history, as weoperationalize and energize the Philippine Mediation Center,

992002] BUILDING CAPABILITY FOR MEDIATION

and professionalize the practice of mediation. The new era ofMediation has arrived.

In operationalizing the Philippine Mediation Center, theAcademy is privileged to have, as its partner, the PhilippineMediation Foundation, Inc., one of the leaders in ADRAdvocacy. It will assist in establishing Mediation Centersthroughout the country and in providing the necessaryinstruction and comprehensive training for all stakeholders inMediation.

Another indispensable partner will be the Office of theCourt Administrator under the leadership of Justice PresbiteroVelasco, Jr. It will furnish the organizational platform for, andcoordination with, the Mediation Units, and strengthen therole of judges and court personnel in making mediation a self-sustaining and perpetual initiative for the Judiciary.

Jointly and severally, we have a long-term mission toperform – to relieve the frustrations at run-away costs oflitigation and the clogged public court system. Let us marchforward and onward, cultivating the field of mediation that isas much as changing the attitudes of people as it is aboutresolving disputes.


TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE F F F F FUTUREUTUREUTUREUTUREUTURE OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION INININININ THETHETHETHETHE C C C C COUNTROUNTROUNTROUNTROUNTRYYYYY

DEAN EDUARDO DE LOS ANGELES

ADVOCATES FORUM FOR DAVAO

JANUARY 25, 2001MARCO POLO HOTEL, DAVAO CITY

TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE F F F F FUTUREUTUREUTUREUTUREUTURE OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION INININININ THETHETHETHETHE P P P P PHILIPPINESHILIPPINESHILIPPINESHILIPPINESHILIPPINES

ISISISISIS N N N N NOOOOOWWWWW A A A A ASSUREDSSUREDSSUREDSSUREDSSURED

CHIEF JUSTICE HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR.LAUNCHING OF THE PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER


TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE G G G G GREAREAREAREAREATTTTT P P P P PRRRRROMISEOMISEOMISEOMISEOMISE OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

MS. ANNABELLE T. ABAYA



TTTTThe Futurhe Futurhe Futurhe Futurhe Future ofe ofe ofe ofe of Mediation in the Countr Mediation in the Countr Mediation in the Countr Mediation in the Countr Mediation in the Countryyyyy∗∗∗∗∗

Dean Eduardo de los Angeles∗∗

I. THE PROBLEM

II. THE PROPOSED SOLUTION

III. OUR EXPERIENCES

IV. THE FUTURE

I am privileged to address this Advocates Forum composed ofmembers of the Judiciary, the Prosecution Service, the ViceMayor and Officers of City Government, members of theAcademe and NGOs, and other prominent professionals ofDavao City. Your mere presence reveals your interest to examinealternative avenues for dispute resolution. But more importantly,your attendance signals your willingness to dialogue and assistus on how to promote mediation in the Philippines.

I shall divide my talk into four parts: the first shall deal withthe problem, i.e., the clogged dockets of our courts; the secondshall dwell on the proposed solution, i.e., to initiate mediation aspart of pre-trial; the third will discuss our experiences during thepilot-testing of mediation; and the fourth shall discuss the futureof mediation, particularly with respect to the Amicable SettlementWeeks Project of the Supreme Court.

∗ Delivered at the Advocates Forum for Davao, on January 25, 2001, at theMarco Polo Hotel, Davao City.

∗∗ Dean Eduardo de los Angeles is the President of the Philippine MediationFoundation, Inc. as well as the Chairperson of the ADR Sub-Committee,Consultants’ Group, Judicial Reforms Office, PHILJA.


I. I. I. I. I. TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE P P P P PRRRRROBLEMOBLEMOBLEMOBLEMOBLEM

Since the Martial Law years, judges have complained about theincreasing number of cases filed in courts. Litigants have alsogrumbled about the delay in the resolution of their cases becauseof the tedious process, and because of the limited time thatcan be allotted to each case every month. As a result, it usuallytakes three to four years to decide a simple collection or damagesuit. This does not even include the protracted appeal whichfollows each decision.

Just consider the aborted impeachment trial. Every day forsix hours, the prosecution presented four to six witnesses whosetestimonies were peppered with objections, who were cross-examined and badgered by the senator-judges. However, despite24 continuous hearing dates, the prosecution could not eventerminate the presentation of evidence. For in every step, counselsbickered on procedural rules. Senator-judges argued against oneanother, making colloquies. The proceedings were just tooadversarial, too technical. What more in ordinary courts?

Thus, according to the Court Administrator, there were8,763,303 pending cases as of December 31, 1999. FromJanuary to September 2000, there were in the:

Newl Newl Newl Newl Newly Filedy Filedy Filedy Filedy Filed Decided/Disposed Decided/Disposed Decided/Disposed Decided/Disposed Decided/Disposed First Level Courts 277,365 159,683 Second Level Courts 133,474 92,282 Total 410,839410,839410,839410,839410,839 251,965251,965251,965251,965251,965

Consequently, 158,874 unresolved cases were added to the ever-increasing number of pending cases. This does not even includethe numerous petitions pending in the Sandiganbayan, Courtof Appeals and the Supreme Court.

1032002] THE FUTURE OF MEDIATION IN THE COUNTRY

Yet, there are only 1,124 first level courts and 950 secondlevel courts throughout the country. Worse, about 39% of thefirst level courts and 25% of the second level courts are vacant.

With the stockpile of cases, the highly technical rules andthe spiralling number of complaints being filed, there is no wayfor the Judiciary to reduce its backlog even if we double or triplethe number of judges. Indeed, even if the first and second levelcourts adjudge more cases, losing parties will still appeal theirdecisions to the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court.

II. II. II. II. II. TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE P P P P PRRRRROPOSEDOPOSEDOPOSEDOPOSEDOPOSED S S S S SOLOLOLOLOLUTIONUTIONUTIONUTIONUTION

Therefore, in 1997, our Supreme Court revised the Rules ofCourt so that during pre-trial, the Courts shall have the optionnot only to refer cases to arbitration (Sec. 1, Rule 20, OldRules), but also to other alternative modes of dispute resolution(Sec. 2, Rule 18, 1997 Rules).

The revision was followed on June 22, 1999, withAdministrative Matter No. 99-6-01, where the Supreme Courtauthorized, on a test pilot basis: a) a training program onMediation/Conciliation to be conducted by professionals, i.e.,lawyers and non-lawyers, as well as retired judges; and b) court-referred mediation in the Regional Trial Courts and MetropolitanTrial Courts of Mandaluyong and Valenzuela Cities.

On November 16, 1999, the Supreme Court approved theguidelines for court-referred mediation in the pilot areas ofMandaluyong and Valenzuela Cities. Under the guidelines, thepilot courts could refer to mediators civil cases involvingdisputes among members of the same family within the sixthcivil degree; collection cases; claims for civil damages; anddisputes arising out of lessor-lessee tenant relationship.


A total of 103 cases were referred for mediation by theMandaluyong and Valenzuela courts. However, only 63 actuallyunderwent mediation because in the rest, one or both of theparties did not attend the mediation proceedings despiterepeated notices. Of the cases that underwent mediation, 26were settled, resulting in a success rate of 41.2%.

Because of the moderate success of the first pilot test, theSupreme Court authorized on July 11, 2000 two more seminar-workshops which were held at the Asian Institute ofManagement, with members of the ADR Sub-committee, Ms.Annabelle Abaya and members of the Singapore MediationCenter as trainors. A four-week internship program ensued togive the participants hands-on experience under the supervisionof trainors. Sixty-six (66) participants attended the seminar-workshops and internship program.

Noticeably, in its authorization, the Supreme Court directedthe inclusion of family disputes concerning dissolution ofconjugal partnership, support and custody of children, whichare more difficult to mediate. Additional courts from Manila,Makati, Pasay and Quezon Cities were authorized to refer casesfor mediation.


During the internship, a total of 49 cases were assigned,although 22 cases were returned to the courts for failure of theparties to attend mediation. Of the 27 cases that were mediated,23 were settled, resulting in a very high success rate of 85.1%.

Significantly, the 23 cases were resolved at half the time ittook the mediators during the first pilot test. This is becausethe second batch was better trained and better supervised duringthe internship.

In October 2000, the Supreme Court, through the PHILJA,again scheduled six seminar-workshops to train 150 prospectivemediators. Ms. Annabelle Abaya was tasked to conduct theprogram and the supplementary internship. After two months,the trainees mediated disputes at a very high 90% settlementrate.

NoNoNoNoNo. of. of. of. of. of Case Case Case Case Cases Mediated in Makati Citys Mediated in Makati Citys Mediated in Makati Citys Mediated in Makati Citys Mediated in Makati City,,,,,PPPPPasig Cityasig Cityasig Cityasig Cityasig City, Que, Que, Que, Que, Quezon Cityzon Cityzon Cityzon Cityzon City 44NoNoNoNoNo. of. of. of. of. of F F F F Failed Mediationailed Mediationailed Mediationailed Mediationailed Mediation 5Success RateSuccess RateSuccess RateSuccess RateSuccess Rate 90%

To my mind, mediation is successful because, first, it is informaland non-confrontational. It leads to the building of rapportbetween the parties. As a result, the parties are more willing toexplore different options without prejudice to their cases.

Second, because mediation offers resolutions at asignificantly lower cost and in a shorter time.


Third, because unlike litigation or arbitration which areoften characterized by a “winner-takes-all” outcome, mediationis not bound by the “zero-sum” game of adjudication. Partiesare free to explore the most novel or creative ways of resolvingtheir problems and need not be confined to the legal definitionof the scope of their dispute.

Fourth, because assuming that in mediation, the parties willwork together to reach an agreement, they will likely be morecommitted to abide by its terms of settlement. A solution that isstructured by the parties themselves is likely to be more satisfactoryand enduring than the one that is imposed by a third party.

Fifth, because mediation preserves the relationship betweenthe parties.

Sixth, and most important, because once the parties reacha compromise that is approved by the court, the dispute ends.There is no more appeal.

III. OIII. OIII. OIII. OIII. OURURURURUR E E E E EXPERIENCESXPERIENCESXPERIENCESXPERIENCESXPERIENCES

Noticeably, while a significant number of cases that actuallyunderwent mediation resulted in Compromise Agreement, abig number of cases selected for mediation did not undergosuch because of the following reasons:

RRRRResistance ofesistance ofesistance ofesistance ofesistance of La La La La Lawywywywywyersersersersers..... Since ADR in general andmediation in particular are not taught in law schools, very fewlawyers know how this alternative method of dispute resolutioncan hasten the settlement of cases. Indeed some lawyers thinkthat mediation is just another procedural step to further delaycases. Thus, lawyers are dubious – or at best, indifferent –about mediation. They do not recommend to their clients themediation of cases. Worse, in our experience, when cases are


referred by the courts for mediation, lawyers impede theproceedings. In some cases, even if the parties have agreed tocompromise, lawyers instruct their clients not to sign thecompromise agreement because their fees have not been includedin the proposed agreement.

However, the Canons of Professional Ethics provide in nouncertain terms that “[a] lawyer shall encourage his clients toavoid, end or settle a controversy if it will admit of a fairsettlement.” (Rule 1.04) Thus, it is said that, a “compromise isoften the better part of justice, as prudence is the better partof valor; a lawyer who encourages compromise is no less theclient’s champion in settlement out of court than he is the client’schampion in the battle in court.” (Curtis, The Advocate)

LacLacLacLacLack ofk ofk ofk ofk of inf inf inf inf infororororormation, understanding and apprmation, understanding and apprmation, understanding and apprmation, understanding and apprmation, understanding and appreciation beciation beciation beciation beciation byyyyypotential userspotential userspotential userspotential userspotential users. . . . . The public does not understand the conceptand advantages of mediation. Neither are they aware of theavailability of mediators. Thus, the need for the holding offorums such as this, the need for advocates, for publication andmedia support, and for testimonials of successful mediations.

Non-appearance ofNon-appearance ofNon-appearance ofNon-appearance ofNon-appearance of par par par par partiestiestiestiesties. . . . . During the pilot-testing ofmediation, many litigants failed to attend the scheduledmediation proceedings because of lack of notice, because theirlawyers did not explain to them the importance of mediation,because they thought mediation was unnecessary as their caseswere already in court. They did not know the opportunitythey missed when they expeditiously settle their disputes withinthe exhausting court process.

It will actually take years to prod litigants to learn andcooperate, unless the courts immediately impose sanctions for


the deliberate refusal of the parties to attend court-referredmediation. But since this kind of mediation is part of pre-trial, the courts can dismiss the complaint if the plaintiff absentshimself, or declare as if in default if he does not attend. Suchsanctions will spread like wild-fire, and lawyers will ensureattendance of the clients in mediation proceedings.

StrStrStrStrStrong Pong Pong Pong Pong Positions/Demandsositions/Demandsositions/Demandsositions/Demandsositions/Demands. . . . . It is also our experience thatcertain parties take very strong positions during mediation andfrustrate quick settlement. This cannot be avoided, especiallyif the parties are still in a very emotional state. But a skilledmediator can calm them and temper their hard positions to beable to discuss options for settlement. A trained mediator candetermine the respective interests of the disputants to veerdiscussions away from polarized positions. He or she canconvince the parties of the adverse consequences of failure tosettle, i.e., reversion to tedious and time-consuming litigation.

DifDifDifDifDifffffficulty oficulty oficulty oficulty oficulty of Cor Cor Cor Cor Corporations to Enter into Comprporations to Enter into Comprporations to Enter into Comprporations to Enter into Comprporations to Enter into Compromiseomiseomiseomiseomise.....There are instances when mediation can be prolonged. Thiswhen one or both parties are corporations. As you know,compromising a case often needs the approval of the Board ofDirectors which seldom meets. Thus, the representative willnot commit even if he is authorized because he will alwaysprefer to submit the proposed compromise to the board forfinal approval.

LacLacLacLacLack ofk ofk ofk ofk of Skilled Mediators Skilled Mediators Skilled Mediators Skilled Mediators Skilled Mediators. . . . . Finally, while we have beenable to train about 250 mediators, their names and addresseshave not been published. The citizenry does not know whoand where they are. The public does not know where their casescan be mediated. This is why we have organized the Philippine


Mediation Center as an umbrella organization for mediators.This center will not only promote mediation, but also providetraining programs and refresher courses. It will supervisemediators, enforce a Code of Conduct, coordinate with courts,periodically make studies on how to further improve and developmediation in the Philippines, and provide mediation servicesto the public.

IVIVIVIVIV. . . . . TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE F F F F FUTUREUTUREUTUREUTUREUTURE

In the near term, the Supreme Court obviously desires to putin place a competent and efficient corps of mediators to assistthe courts resolve cases covered by its November 16, 1999guidelines.

Buoyed by the successful pilot testing of court-referredmediation, the Supreme Court has decided to train moremediators all over the country, and has targeted March 26 toApril 6, 2001 as Amicable Settlement Weeks, where about 400mediators in Metro Manila, Cebu City and Davao City willsimultaneously be assigned cases to mediate in the hope thatthousands of cases can be settled to partially unclog court dockets.Our beloved Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr. has even statedthat the Settlement Weeks will be one of the flagship projects ofthe Supreme Court in celebration of its Centenary this year.

In the long term however, the Supreme Court wants toinstitutionalize mediation. Just recently, it has approved thepetition of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines for aMandatory Continuing Legal Education for lawyers as acondition to continued membership in the Bar. Out of the 36hours of continuing legal education every three years, lawyersmust undergo 5 hours of education in alternative disputeresolution. Obviously, the Supreme Court desires lawyers to


learn and avail of mediation as a tool to settle disputes. Itwants a re-orientation of the legal profession. It urges diversionof certain cases to mediators and out of the judicial system.This will require more trained mediators, better barangaymediations, an improved mediation system in quasi-judicialagencies of government and conflicts education. For only thencan the backlog of cases be drastically reduced.

We, therefore, have to persuade lawyers and businessmento be aware of nuances in the alternative modes of disputeresolution, and encourage them to include mediation andarbitration clauses in contracts and collective bargainingagreements. We have to convince law schools to offer ADR asa mandatory or elective subject. We must continue to holdseminars, symposia and conventions like this to regularly honeour skills in mediation. Finally, we must regulate mediators sothat they will always abide by a code of ethics in order to preventirregularities and/or anomalies that can undermine thedevelopment of mediation as a useful tool for dispute resolution.

Thank you.

TTTTThe Futurhe Futurhe Futurhe Futurhe Future ofe ofe ofe ofe of Mediation in the Mediation in the Mediation in the Mediation in the Mediation in thePhilippines is NoPhilippines is NoPhilippines is NoPhilippines is NoPhilippines is Now Assurw Assurw Assurw Assurw Assurededededed∗∗∗∗∗


Madame Justice and PHILJA Chancellor Herrera; Mr. Justiceand Vice-Chancellor, Martinez; Court of Appeals JusticeHormachuelos and Magtolis; Retired Justice Guingona; FormerSolicitor General Dick Galvez; Prof. Suarez; Mr. Wuertz ofUSAID; Dr. Rood of The Asia Foundation; Fellow Judges;Dean de los Angeles; Ms. Abaya; Directors of the PhilippineMediation Center; Mediators; Advocates of Mediation; Friendsand Guests; Ladies and gentlemen:

Good Evening.

To place this affair in its proper perspective, let me quote afew lines from one of the more forgettable cases decided by theSupreme Court. In Philippine Airlines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals,G.R. No. 119706, 14 March 1996 (325 Phil 303, 334), theSupreme Court, per Mr. Justice Regalado, had opportunity toremark as follows:

[T]he case at bar goes into the annals of our jurisprudenceafter six years and recedes into the memories of our legalexperience as just another inexplicable inevitability. We willnever know exactly how many man-hours went into thepreparation, litigation and adjudication of this simple

* Delivered at the Launching of the Philippine Mediation Center, on April 6,2001, at Top of the Citi, Citibank Towers, Makati City.


dispute over an oven, which the parties will no doubt insistthey contested as a matter of principle. One thing, however,is certain. As long as the first letter in ‘principle’ is somehowoutplaced by the peso sign, the courts will always have toresolve similar controversies although mutual goodwill couldhave dispensed with judicial recourse.

Even the ponente had to spend several hours on the case.The ponencia occupies thirty-one (31) pages of the PhilippineReports. That case was decided in 1996 and, thus far, the firstletter in ‘principle’ is still outplaced by the peso sign. TheSupreme Court, however, refuses to stand idly by. The timesdemand that the Judiciary be pro-active, and so it is, in the wayit addresses its deficiencies, in the way it maximizes its strengths,and in the way it delivers justice.

Precisely, to prevent such quarrels over mundane affairs fromclogging the dockets of courts and congesting the flow ofjustice, the Supreme Court, through the laudable efforts of thePhilippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) and assistance fromthe United States Agency for International Development(USAID) and The Asia Foundation (TAF), has launched anextensive campaign to promote mediation as a means ofresolving disputes.

During the past few months, the PHILJA was hard at worktraining would-be mediators, preparing criteria for cases suitablefor mediation, drawing up the administrative requirements toensure the smooth implementation of a mediation program,and promoting widespread support for the initiative. ThePHILJA was, in short, building the country’s capability formediation.

1132002] THE FUTURE OF MEDIATION IN THEPHILIPPINES IS NOW ASSURED

Throughout those long weeks, the pace of the activitiesnever flagged. The completion of one event did not signify anend, but signaled the beginning of another endeavor;foundations were being laid, one on top of another, bringingthe country closer to its objective of quality justice.

Tonight, history repeats itself for the Judiciary’s mediationinitiative. After just recently completing two weeks of resolvingdisputes referred for mediation by selected trial courts, we willnow launch the Philippine Mediation Center.

The mediation weeks showcased the power of mediationas a tool for achieving justice. For two weeks, from 26 Marchto 6 April 2001, selected courts in Cebu, Davao and Manilahad some of their cases undergo mediation.

The success rate of mediation through those two weeksconfirmed that it is an alternative mode of dispute resolutionwhose time has come in the Philippines. Now, we are indeedprepared to move on to the next stage of mediation advancementin the country.

The Philippine Mediation Center, as the name suggests,will be the center of all initiatives on mediation. It willperpetuate all mediation efforts and thus sustain the initiativethrough the years to come.

Specifically, the Philippine Mediation Center will promotethe use of court-related mediation; encourage the developmentof other mediation applications to divert cases from the trialcourts; provide training for the development of new mediators;accredit new mediators and determine continued authorization


of mediators; ensure quality mediation services for court-relatedcases; and develop and prescribe curricula for mediation trainingas part of court-connected and legal education programs.

The Center will be very busy indeed. You will noticecomprehensive scope of its activities. Certainly, as the needarises, these functions may even diversify. No effort shall bespared to make sure that the country has no shortage of effectivemediators and that such mediators continue to effectivelymediate disputes.

Perhaps men and women of principle will still argue overovens. Perhaps they will take the matter very seriously, enoughfor them to bring their dispute before a neutral third party todecide the argument for them. In the past, they would havehad a little choice but to go to court. Now we have the tools,the mechanisms and the people to make sure not only that thecourts are spared from having to add that case to their workload,but also that the parties themselves get a swift, cost efficientand acceptable end to their argument. In the process, we willbe reviving that part of Philippine culture that seemed to havebeen lost with the advent of modern ideas and ways: the Filipinocustom of bayanihan, where neighbors, and even strangers, helpeach other as they disentangle themselves from problem afterproblem.

I envision a Judiciary that is independent, effective andefficient, and worthy of public trust and confidence. Mediationis one of the many instruments that will fulfill that vision. Aswith many initiatives of the Supreme Court, the future ofmediation, having earlier begun in small way, is now assuredwith the Philippine Mediation Center. Your overwhelming

1152002] THE FUTURE OF MEDIATION IN THEPHILIPPINES IS NOW ASSURED

support has made this possible. Your continuing support willensure the achievement of our common goal, which is qualityjustice for the people.

I congratulate PHILJA for again contributing to the futureof the Judiciary. I congratulate all our mediators for rising tothe challenge of being peacemakers. I thank our friends, theUSAID, represented by Mr. Wuertz and The Asia Foundation,represented by Dr. Rood, Agile, PhilExport-TAPS, PLDT,Shangrila, and others for their support to this worthy initiative.And I thank all of you here tonight for sharing anotherunfolding chapter in the history of the Judiciary. I congratulatethe Directors and officers of the Philippine Mediation Centerfor giving a part of themselves in this historic endeavor. Youcan go global. Your acronym is PMC – Peace for MankindCenter. You have launched the center at this historic place –Top of the Citi. What a place to launch the PMC – Top ofthe Citi, where you can see the vast panorama of the City ofMakati with a sea of humanity which needs you for peace,understanding and tranquility.

May we all be peacemakers, and may God bless us all as wecontinue in this path of peace through mediation.

Thank you, and goodnight.

TTTTThe Grhe Grhe Grhe Grhe Great Preat Preat Preat Preat Promise ofomise ofomise ofomise ofomise of Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation Mediation ∗

Ms. Annabelle T. Abaya∗∗

I am delighted to inform you that based on the unofficial partialresults of the Settlement Weeks Nerve Center’s Operation QuickCount as of 2:30 p.m. today, the combined efforts of ourmediators and judges resulted in the successful settlement of846 cases. This represents 85% of total cases mediated duringthe past nine-and-a-half days. Based on the estimated averagecost of Php35,000 to litigate a case, the results of the SettlementWeeks Project has saved our citizens a total of Php29.6 million.

We held Settlement Weeks from March 26 to April 6. Atotal of 302 courts in Metro Manila, Cebu and Davao Cites,involving 362 trained mediators, participated in the programin accordance with Administrative Order Nos. 20-2001 and24-2001 issued by the Chief Justice.

It was not an easy start for us. Forty-six (46) hours beforethe start of Settlement Weeks, the Hall of Justice of QuezonCity, housing forty-four (44) courts, was gutted by fire. AllQuezon City mediators reported for duty on Monday morningdespite the uncertainty of holding the scheduled mediations.We are fortunate that the almost heroic leadership of MannyCabugao, our Supervisor in Quezon City, galvanized the spiritof the mediators who gathered at the court annex only to be

* Delivered at the Launching of the Philippine Mediation Center, on April 6,2001, at Top of the Citi, Citibank Towers, Makati City.

** Ms. Annabelle T. Abaya is PHILJA’s Trainor/Consultant on Mediation.

1172002] THE GREAT PROMISE OF MEDIATION

dispensed by a sudden heavy downpour of rain. Five courtswere able to operate on the first day, a few more on the nextday, and by Wednesday, all courts except for nine normalizedmediation proceedings – this despite the harsh conditions ofheat and stuffiness since there was no air-conditioning, and thestale odor of smoke.

In the rest of the other courts in Metro Manila, Cebu andDavao, the atmosphere was a mixture of excitement and jitters.This was matched by many dramatic highlights in the course ofmediation – mediators getting cursed by threatened orgrandstanding lawyers, families reconciling in tears after decadesof separation, near fist fights by husbands and paramours. Butas the week wore on, the mediators donned a thicker coat ofconfidence, gained from their growing experience.

Thus, as of noon today, called and faxed-in reports placeat 3,880 the total number of cases referred by the courts formediation. Of this 2,116 or 54% were returned to courtwithout having been mediated, 763 or 20% average is pending,and 1,001 or 26% were mediated. It is expected that by Tuesday,the last day for mediators to turn in their reports, the pendingcases would be reclassified as returned to court, or successfulor failed mediations.

I wish to call your attention, however, to the cases that weresent back to court without having been mediated at all. Thecause for such returns are:

1. Non-appearance of one or both parties – this accountsfor approximately 60% of all cases returned;

2. Lack of or limited authority to mediate – this accountsfor about 30% of all cases returned;


3. Other reasons – about 10% of cases was returned tocourt. This included non-mediatable issues or partiesnot willing to mediate due to resistance from lawyers,who are also sometimes given instructions by theirclients to delay the case.

Turning to mediated cases, 846 cases or 85% weresuccessfully settled, while 155 cases or 15% failed. This is closeto the national average range achieved during the 15 pilot projectsconducted in the last nine months. What is clear, therefore, isthat cases that actually undergo mediation have a more than 80%chance of being settled. This rate is much higher than theinternational mediation settlement average of 60% to 70% inSingapore, America, Australia, Canada and Latin America.

Having proven that mediation works, it is therefore indicatedthat measures must be undertaken to increase the number ofcases that actually reach mediation. These measures mightinclude:

1. Changing the Rules of Court to make appearance oflitigants in mediation mandatory. This does not meanthat they are required to mediate; it only means theyshould appear in the first session, be fully informed ofmediation, and then decide voluntarily to mediate or not.

2. Increasing mediation advocacy and education amonglawyers. This is to ensure that they come prepared formediation and to make them allies, not enemies ofmediation.

3. Strengthening public information on mediation so thatthe public may recognize the benefits of mediation andif possible, exhaust all means of resolving disputesbefore resorting to the courts.

1192002] THE GREAT PROMISE OF MEDIATION

4. Encouraging corporations and commercial entities toprovide mechanisms that will enable them to effectivelyengage in mediation. Some boards of corporations takeas long as three to six months to meet, thus preventingthe timely issuance of authority to their representativeto negotiate, which drags the approval of settlementagreements. These corporations must realize that theyare the biggest beneficiaries of mediation. Fortunately,this is now being recognized by companies such as BPICredit Corporation, PCI Leasing and others who wereamazed at the decisive and swift resolution of a majorityof their cases during the Settlement Weeks.

With the result generated in the past two weeks, I am alsodelighted that approximately thirty (30) mediators will qualifyto the Peacemakers’ Circle of the Chief Justice. This constitutesthe class of high achieving mediators who successfully settledat least ten (10) cases during the past ten (10) days. The finallist of our elite performers will be announced and awarded ona separate occasion.

As we end the Settlement Weeks today, I wish to quoteLarry Sipin, Manila Standard columnist, who wrote afterexperiencing mediation the following: “I wish mediation will“I wish mediation will“I wish mediation will“I wish mediation will“I wish mediation willgggggo on fo on fo on fo on fo on forororororeeeeevvvvvererererer.....”””””

I think for tonight and the duration of the Holy Week, ourmediators must take their well deserved rest. But on EasterWeek, let’s all start forever.

IIIIINTERNNTERNNTERNNTERNNTERNAAAAATIONTIONTIONTIONTIONALALALALAL D D D D DEVELEVELEVELEVELEVELOPMENTSOPMENTSOPMENTSOPMENTSOPMENTS

ONONONONON M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

IIIIINTERNNTERNNTERNNTERNNTERNAAAAATIONTIONTIONTIONTIONALALALALAL D D D D DEVELEVELEVELEVELEVELOPMENTSOPMENTSOPMENTSOPMENTSOPMENTS INININININ THETHETHETHETHE U U U U USESESESESE OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

MS. ANNABELLE T. ABAYA

ADVOCATES FORUMS FOR CEBU (WATERFRONT HOTEL),DAVAO (MARCO POLO HOTEL), FOR JUDGES (METROPOLITAN CLUB),

LAWYERS (METROPOLITAN CLUB), BUSINESS (COURT OF APPEALS

AUDITORIUM), AND THE GOVERNMENT SECTOR ( COURT OF APPEALS

AUDITORIUM)JANUARY 19, JANUARY 25, FEBRUARY 1, FEBRUARY 2,

FEBRUARY 15, AND FEBRUARY 22, 2001

InterInterInterInterInternational Denational Denational Denational Denational Devvvvvelopments in theelopments in theelopments in theelopments in theelopments in theUse of MediationUse of MediationUse of MediationUse of MediationUse of Mediation∗∗∗∗∗

Ms. Annabelle T. Abaya∗∗

All societies, nations, organizations and interpersonalrelationships undergo conflict at various times and in varyingintensities. We, in the Philippines, do not need to be remindedof this too often because all we have to do is open the newspapers.And we wonder if there is any bit of respite from one conflict toanother plaguing this country. But conflict is not necessarilydysfunctional or evil. It is when people exceed the limits ofcompetitive behavior and seek to inflict harm on their opponentsthat conflict exacts unproductive and destructive results.

On the positive side, conflicts can produce growth, knowledge,understanding and improve relationships. This depends on thedisputants’ abilities and desire to create ways of solving problemscooperatively, to overcome distrust and animosity, and to findsolutions that satisfy their interests. What is apparent is that mostpeople in conflict cannot rise above the psychological barriers thatallow them to engage in an effective process of negotiating theirproblems. And therefore, they need help.

∗ Delivered at the Advocates Forums for Cebu (Waterfront Hotel), Davao (MarcoPolo Hotel), for Judges (Metropolitan Club), Lawyers (Metropolitan Club),Business (Court of Appeals Auditorium), and the Government Sector ( Court ofAppeals Auditorium) respectively held on January 19, January 25, February 1,February 2, February 15, and February 22, 2001.

∗∗ Ms. Annabelle T. Abaya is PHILJA’s Trainor/Consultant on Mediation.


Mediation is the help that is most attuned to what peopletoday seek. Thus, mediation, as a concept, is sweeping the worldby storm. It is a system of resolving conflicts where an acceptedneutral third party facilitates two or more conflicting parties innegotiating an agreement to settle their dispute.

However, mediation is a long-known, yet loosely, used word.When I came home last year as a consultant of the USAIDWorld Bank to report on the state of alternative disputeresolution in the Philippines, I was elated to hear that manyorganizations, quasi-judicial agencies and even our barangaysystem use it. On close study, however, I realized that many infact use not mediation, but conciliation and arbitration or manyvaried hybrids in between.

Let me clarify what I mean. We all know that when conflictsgo out of hand, we go to the courts. We litigate.

For example, when one government official was askedrecently if they have consulted the people on the dumping ofgarbage in Semirara, he replied, “No, the case is already in court.”Going to the court seems to be the knee jerk reaction to resolvingconflicts. Perhaps it is due to the proliferation of lawyers.Maybe it is the western legalistic influence, which puts emphasison evidence, rights and laws. There is this mistaken notionthat filing a case and getting the court’s ruling will solve theproblem.

But experience tells us that long after a ruling is handeddown, animosity continues. Cases are appealed, re-filed undera different guise, or losers set up every barrier possible to defythe ruling of the court. This is because the courts have

1232002] INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTSIN THE USE OF MEDIATION

limitations and are unable to cope with the full range ofsubstantive justice such as human emotions, identity and value.

The dissatisfaction over the limitations of the courts wasexpounded on as early as 1906. Roscoe Pound argued thatlegal formalism “has failed to produce results based on sharedunderlying values and therefore encourages the instrumentaluse of law.” He continued that:

[T]he effect of our exaggerated contentious procedure isnot only to irritate the parties, witnesses and jurors, but togive the whole community a false notion of the purposesand end of law…if the law is a mere game, neither playerswho take part in it nor the public who witness it are servedby evading it…thus the courts, instituted to administerjustice according to the law, are made agents or abettors oflawlessness.

Furthermore, inability to meet the people’s desire for greaterparticipation and greater control over decisions that affect theirlives has stimulated the thirst for alternative systems that cancomplement the court system – processes that are faster, lesscostly, more user-friendly, and can respond to the full scope ofpeople’s conflicts.

Arbitration, which is private litigation, emerged to providerelief to the congested court dockets. However, it has lost muchof the sexiness it enjoyed in the 1950’s when it was firstconceived. This is due to the advent of new democracies witha passion for people empowerment, which quickly eroded thetop-down decision-giving nature of arbitration.


Conciliation became the answer to the limitations ofarbitration. In conciliation, the neutral third party makes nodecisions but takes an active role in suggesting and inventingsolutions. While conciliation can be effective, the strongposition taken by the conciliator in pushing for solutions cancorrode the confidence of the parties that the solution lieswithin them and not with the conciliator. This also lessens theparties’ responsibility over the solution and consequentlydiminishes their commitment to make the agreement work. Thiscan even lead to the conciliator being blamed for an agreementthat did not work.

Mediation, an improvement over conciliation, is thereforeconsidered a higher art form. Today’s mediation process seeksto get at the interests of the parties in conflict. Interests aremotivations that make the parties desire to settle.

For example, I might prove in court that my client owes meP10 million pesos in principal, penalty, and interest. But Imight settle for something less because I do not have a 100%guarantee of winning and if I waited for a decision, the amountI might get five years from now may only be half of its value.Or, I might settle because I put greater value preserving myrelationship. Pragmatics and relationship are strong intereststhat make people want to reach an agreement. A mediatorhelps parties discover and understand their own interests togenerate options that could lead to a durable agreement.

Mediation has thus emerged as the most exciting alternativeto the range of dispute resolution systems in the market. It issubtle because solutions are offered in the form of a question,rather than a suggestion. It is humane because information is


conveyed without the toxicity of animosity. It is enduringbecause interests, which are the rational basis for settlement,are explored. True mediation is also devoid of third party agendaor advocacy.

A mediator has no other stake in the process but to helpthe parties reach a workable, acceptable and satisfying end. Itdoes not matter what he thinks. He does not promote the law,his religion, his own value system, his cause or his concept ofwhat is right or wrong. He is trained to be non-judgmental.After all this explanation, in the final analysis, mediation isbetter seen than described.

Let us take a short trip through history. Mediation is rootedin almost all cultures of the world – Jewish, Christian, Islamic,Hindu, Buddhist, Confucian and many indigenous cultures.Biblical history shows that Jewish communities used mediationto resolve civil and religious differences. These were eventuallypassed to Christian communities who saw Christ as the suprememediator between God and man – the one who gave himself asransom for all, to be testified in due time (Timothy 2:5-6).This tradition was handed on to the Catholic Church in WesternEurope and the Orthodox churches in the East MediterraneanWorld.

Islamic cultures recount that Middle Eastern pastoralsocieties’ problems were resolved through community meetingsof elders who discussed and mediated conflicts. The quadiswere specialized intermediaries who attempted to preserve socialharmony by reaching an agreement rather than applying thestrict letter of the law.


Indonesia, influenced by Arabic and Islam culture, employedmusyawarah, a consensually-based conflict management process.The Hindus, on the other hand, have used the panchayat justicesystem, in which a panel of five (5) mediate disputes to addresswelfare issues and grievances in the community. In China andJapan, mediation enjoyed wide acceptance due to religious andphilosophical emphasis on social consensus, moral persuasion,balance and harmony in human relationships. This traditionwas carried to India, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Nepal and Tibet.

In America, the Puritans and Quakers’ alternative systemof resolving conflicts operated side-by-side with indigenousmechanisms of Native Americans who used consensus-basedcouncil meetings led by elders.

Now let us fast forward to the modern day. Mediation iscredited to Mary Parker Follet, a Massachusetts-based womanin the 1800’s who wrote and spoke of integrating interests, theneed for mutual gains and principled negotiation. Many oftoday’s conflict resolution gurus such as Roger Fisher, Bill Uryand Lawrence Susskind adopted the concepts and language ofMs. Follet in the field they propagate today.

By the turn of the century, mediation became a formallyinstitutionalized and recognized profession. And in the past25 years, modern mediation practice has grown exponentially.This is due to several factors:

1) the wider acknowledgment of individual human rightsand dignity;

2) the expansion of aspirations for democraticparticipation at all social and political levels;


3) the belief that an individual has a right to participatein and take control of decisions affecting him or her;

4) an ethic-supporting private ordering, and

5) trends in some locales for broader tolerance of diversityin all aspects.

Change was also triggered by a broader distaste forauthoritative, top-down, and imposed decision-makingprocesses that do not adequately address the parties’ stronglyfelt interests. The increasing costs in money, human resources,time, interpersonal and community harmony of adversarial,win-lose systems were also detested.

What resulted is the expansion of mediation geographicallyand professionally. Today, mediation has specializations in awide range of fields. In the private and public sectors inAmerica, Europe, Canada and Australia, mediation is being usedearly to prevent costly strikes and deadlocks. The USDepartment of Justice uses mediation to avert disputes in thecommunities involving discrimination, ethnicity, the economy,tenancy, homelessness, and even police brutality. Communitymediation has also been adopted in China, Japan, Hongkong,Africa, Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, Malaysia, SoutheastAsia, Eastern Europe and Latin America.

An important mediation practice occurs in Americaneducational institutions. Mediation has been shown to cause adramatic increase in academic performance by infusing conflictstudies into the curriculum or teaching kids how to mediatethe problems of their peers.


The fastest growing practice is in family disputes, which isused in Japan, Hongkong, China, North and South America,and Korea. It has been found that mediated or consensualsettlements, instead of court judgments, on custody, supportand property division are more humanly addressed prior todivorce. In Canada, New Zealand, Australia and the U.S.,mediation is also extensively utilized within public and privateorganizations to handle interpersonal and institutional disputesrelated to racial, ethnic, gender and sexual orientation,discrimination in the workplace, sexual harassment, disabilitiesand process and grievance complaints.

Since the 1980’s, mediation became the preferred disputeresolution process in the corporate and commercial arena in manyparts of the world, ‘instead of arbitration.’ It is effective inaddressing disputes concerning contracts, failure to perform,product liability, patent infringement, trademark violations,intellectual property, insurance and medical claims. Worldorganizations such as the UN, World Trade Organization, andAPEC see mediation as an alternative to their highly western andlegalistic method of resolving transnational conflicts.

Mediation is extensively used to resolve large public disputesover environmental and social policies in America and Asia. Ithas been proven beneficial in developing new regulations througha process of regulatory negotiations (or “reg-neg”), wherepertinent key stakeholders are convened, and negotiations areconducted to develop consensual recommendation to government.

But the most exciting development is the use of mediationin the courts, starting with disputes in the family, estateproceedings, tenancy, and sums of money. Remarkable


settlement success has encouraged the usually conservativejudicial system to pursue court-based negotiation with vigor.

One significant stimulus to the development of court-connected mediation is the belief that an efficient justice systemis closely correlated to economic development. In aneconometric analysis conducted by Berkowitz, Pistor andRichard covering 49 countries, it is indicated that a 1% increasein the effectiveness of the country’s legal institution translatesto a 4.75% increase in GNP per capita.

It is viewed that sustainable economic growth cannot bemeasured through traditional indicators such as high growth,export figures, and strong financial markets. What is moreimportant is the presence of structures and institutions thataddress the gnawing factors undermining the social fabric of anation - those that breed feudalism, inequity and dependency.

An inefficient and ineffective justice system greatly contributesto a nation’s oppressive structures. The formal legal system isexclusive and narrow, thereby reducing the poor and marginalized’saccess to justice. When the courts are clogged, justice is effectivelydenied. Our current backlog is well over 1,000,000 cases rising atthe rate of 10% per year. The construction industry in thePhilippines determined in a study that the average duration ofsettling cases is 15 years. Delay translates to massive loss of money,closure of business, loss of jobs and opportunities and permanentdamage to litigants’ relationships.

On the other hand, mediation offers relief to courts besiegedby backlogs. It is a viable option to a court system plagued bycorruption, inadequate resources and systemic biases. It is not a


replacement but a complement to the court system in improvingthe quality of justice by increasing party satisfaction over theoutcome. By freeing the judges of extraneous cases or preservingthe court to handle more important questions of law, judges canhave the time to render better thought-out decisions.

Mediation is also speedier, less expensive, and moreempowering. From a development perspective, the use ofmediation increases civic engagement and advances leadershipand political education. Mediation arrests lengthy disputesthat delay development and erode investor confidence. Thesefindings are borne out all over the world – from America toAustralia, from Latin America and Canada to war torn nationssuch as Estonia, Hungary, Croatia, Cyprus, and Rwanda.

Now mediation has received the imprimatur of the SupremeCourt of the Philippines. Over the past twelve (12) months,the Supreme Court, through the Philippine Judicial Academy,has launched several pilot projects in over thirty (30) courts inMetro Manila, with an astounding settlement rate of up to85%-90%. By the end of February this year, the PHILJAwould have trained over 400 new mediators in Manila, Cebuand Davao in the classroom and in actual court setting. ByMarch, these mediators will form the backbone of SettlementWeeks when the courts will stop litigation and refer some40,000 cases to mediation.

We ask you to support mediation and Settlement Weeksbecause we can soon make court backlog a thing of the past.We can improve the quality of justice. We ask you to help uspersuade others to mediate before they litigate.

Maraming Salamat Po!


TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATTTTTORSORSORSORSORS’’’’’ M M M M MISSIONISSIONISSIONISSIONISSION

CHIEF JUSTICE HILARIO G. DAVIDE, JR.ACCREDITATION CEREMONY FOR METRO MANILA MEDIATORS

NOVEMBER 9, 2001COURT OF APPEALS AUDITORIUM, MANILA

USAID USAID USAID USAID USAID ANDANDANDANDAND THETHETHETHETHE P P P P PHILIPPINESHILIPPINESHILIPPINESHILIPPINESHILIPPINES’’’’’ N N N N NEWEWEWEWEW P P P P PEAEAEAEAEACEMAKERSCEMAKERSCEMAKERSCEMAKERSCEMAKERS

MR. JOSEPH S. RYAN

MEDIATION CONFERENCE AND WORKSHOP

MARCH 21, 2001, AT THE MANILA HOTEL

TTTTThe Mediators’he Mediators’he Mediators’he Mediators’he Mediators’ Mission Mission Mission Mission Mission∗∗∗∗∗


Mme. Chancellor, Justice Melencio Herrera; Vice-Chancellor,Justice Martinez; Mme. Presiding Justice Ma. Alicia Martinezof the Court of Appeals; Mr. Wuerts of USAID; Mr. Carmonaof AGILE; Atty. Brenda Angeles of The Asia Foundation; Ms.Lofradez of PhilExport-TAPS; Dear Mediators; Friends andGuests:

Shalom! This is a Hebrew greeting which imparts peace.Peace is a gift of God. Among the aims of our mediationprogram is to bring peace to parties involved in a conflict, whichis why you, my dear mediators, are rightfully called peacemakers.

I find no necessity for inspiring you with a message. I, forone, am inspired merely by the sight of so many apostles ofpeace in our midst. Let me instead take this opportunity togive my warmest congratulations to you, dear mediators, fortaking your oath as such. You are now officially peacemakersand true instruments of justice.

Your oath, however, entails an arduous responsibility as youwill be playing a critical role in the settlement of court-referreddisputes.

You have been equipped with the needed skills, trainingand techniques for mediation. With your caring presence during

* Delivered at the Accreditation Ceremony for Metro Manila Mediators, onNovember 9, 2001, at the Court of Appeals Auditorium, Manila.

1332002] THE MEDIATORS’ MISSION

mediation proceedings and the wisdom you have gained fromyour training and experiences, justice is certainly just an openmind away.

The English poet, George Herbert, once wrote: “A leancompromise is better than a fat lawsuit.” Indeed, this is themeat of mediation. Litigation, as many can attest, isunderstandably lengthy, in fealty to the requirements of dueprocess. It is stressful, tedious, expensive, and it often generatesill will inasmuch as only one party must win the case.

Mediation, on the other hand, promises a more evenhandedresolution to conflicts as mediators merely facilitate theachievement of solutions which are advanced by the partiesthemselves. The resulting conclusion is more satisfactory andenduring for the parties involved. Everyone wins in mediation.It is, in more ways than one, the courtroom equivalent ofbayanihan, where fellow community members help theirneighbors overcome a burden.

I have always stressed that the system of administration ofjustice must be geared to achieve the goal of fair, swift, andinexpensive delivery of justice. This is why I have committedmy full support to the mediation activities of the SupremeCourt, spearheaded by the Philippine Judicial Academy.

Mediation is truly a blessing to our society. Aside fromthe obvious benefit of decongesting court dockets, thisalternative mode of dispute resolution likewise teaches us tocultivate a culture of peace. Let me elaborate.


It does not take any particular specialization to be amediator. One does not have to be a lawyer or a doctor or anengineer to mediate. As long as one satisfies the minimumrequirements for the mediation program, one can be a mediator.Potentially then, anyone can be a mediator, anyone can be apeacemaker, and it is very conceivable to have a multitude ofpeacemakers spread across the country.

The mediators’ peacemaking skills will inevitably find theirway to their daily lives, and their advocacy for peace willeventually touch everyone in their neighborhood or theirbarangay. Thus, from one mediator, we can build an entirecommunity of peace advocates. Imagine what a multitude ofmediators can do.

I am very pleased that the Philippine Judicial Academy ispropelled by a similar conviction on the merits of mediation.Under the able leadership of our Chancellor, the alwaysenergized Madam Justice Ameurfina A. Melencio Herrera, thePHILJA has set into motion this worthwhile initiative in judicialreform.

The initiative has found a remarkable amount of supportfrom well-meaning organizations, such as USAID, The AsiaFoundation, the Singapore Mediation Center, the AcceleratingGrowth, Investment and Liberalization with Equity or AGILE,PhilExport-TAPS, and the Philippine Bar Association.

With the launch on 6 April 2001 of the PhilippineMediation Center, or PMC, we can look forward to a brighterfuture for mediation and justice. The PMC will train newmediators, actively campaign for mediation, and provide

1352002] THE MEDIATORS’ MISSION

mediation services for court-referred cases. A Memorandumof Agreement between the PHILJA and the PMC Foundation,as well as the Proposed Structures and Guidelines for theInstitutionalization of Mediation in the Philippines, wereapproved by the Supreme Court in a Resolution dated 16October 2001.

With these developments we can expect a lighter caseloadfor trial courts. This, in turn, will afford judges enough time tofocus more on the quality, than the quantity, of their decisions.

I commend and thank the PHILJA and its consultants andthe donor community for helping transform our vision of anefficient and effective justice system into a firm reality.

And I salute the mediators for responding to the call forpeace, and for willingly offering their services withoutexpectation of remuneration. I am deeply moved by yourmagnanimity. May your tribe increase. However, since youwill have a vital role in the swift and cost-efficient dispensationof justice, it is but right that justice be also done to you.

Thus, in the same 16 October resolution which I mentionedearlier, the Supreme Court likewise approved the CompensationGuidelines for Mediators and Supervisors. Under theGuidelines, seventy percent of the mediation fee of a particularcase will go to the mediator who mediated the case.

The true reward, though, for the mediator’s services isbeyond measure, and the value of such service cannot be reducedto monetary terms. The delicate balance of justice lies partlyin your hands. The weight on your shoulders is truly great. Yet


as I am confident that you will remain true to your oath, I amcertain that you will ably fulfill responsibilities with competenceand excellence.

Thank you and Godspeed to you in your journey along thepath of justice and peace through mediation. Peace be with usall.

USAID and USAID and USAID and USAID and USAID and TTTTThe Philippines’he Philippines’he Philippines’he Philippines’he Philippines’New PNew PNew PNew PNew Peacemakeacemakeacemakeacemakeacemakersersersersers

Mr. Joseph S. Ryan, Jr.∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗

Honorable Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide, Jr., Madame JusticeAmeurfina A. Melencio Herrera, Justice Antonio M. Martinez,Ladies and Gentlemen:

It is my distinct pleasure to appear before this gathering ofmen and women who may rightly be called the Philippines’new peacemakers. The country needs to enlist more peoplelike you – men and women who provide an enthusiastic, flexibleand humanistic approach to settling disputes.

The United States Agency for International Development(USAID), which, as you know, provides funding for The AsiaFoundation, the Philippine Exporters Confederation, andAGILE, has been interested in the field of law and conflictresolution for many years. We have been concerned with theproblem of delay in the courts and access to justice not only inthis country, but in other parts of the world as well. Mediation,we believe, can help many countries in resolving a large part oftheir case overload and thus enable their courts to make moreeffective use of their precious time.

∗ Delivered at the Mediation Conference and Workshop, on March 21, 2001, atthe Manila Hotel.

∗∗ Mr. Joseph S. Ryan, Jr. is the Chief of the Office of Economic Developmentand Governance of USAID.


Every Filipino has the right to a prompt day in court. Wideruse of mediation can also mean that he or she also has accessto an alternative method which, in some cases, can be quickerand less costly. Mediation is also a valuable process becausepeople with a stake in the outcome have a role in deciding forthemselves what the outcome should be.

Thus, we are very happy to be of assistance to the SupremeCourt, through the Philippine Judicial Academy, in promotingcourt-referred mediation. We strongly support the SupremeCourt in its effort to institutionalize mediation as part ofofficial court process.

In the past, USAID also supported The Asia Foundationin the formation of CONCORD, or the Council for the Non-Court Resolution of Disputes. We are very pleased to see thatone of the pioneers of CONCORD, Dean Eduardo de losAngeles, is very much active in this endeavor.

In addition, USAID has supported the training ofmediators at the Departments of Agrarian Reform (DAR) andof Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), as well as incivil society, where a group called Mediator’s Network orMedNEt has been formed.

We are confident that with PHILJA’s leadership, the supplyof full-time professional and independent mediators from theprivate sector will continue to grow.

I would like to add that, at the community level, USAID issupporting groups who are strengthening dispute settlementthrough the Barangay Jusitce System. This System is building

1392002] USAID AND THE PHILIPPINES’NEW PEACEMAKERS

an excellent record of achievement in the project areas, and wehope that Barangay Justice will receive systematic support toexpand in other areas from both the Department of Justice (DOJ)and the Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG).

In the future, USAID also hopes to see disputes regardingeconomic and commercial law benefit from application of thesame principles that underlie court-referred mediation andBarangay Justice. By ensuring that the people and agencies, witha stake in the outcome of economic regulation and commerciallaw disputes, are fully involved in the resolution process, not onlycan specialized expertise be brought to bear on these disputes,but it should be possible to reduce an inappropriate burden thatpresently rests too much on the courts alone.

If financial assistance for research, training and proceduraldevelopment would be useful in making fuller use of the courts’partnership with regulatory and quasi-judicial agencies, USAIDwould give its support. We hope that this element of the SupremeCourt’s program would develop further in the future.

As you can see, USAID views all these related legal andjudicial initiatives as having tremendous potential for improvinggovernance and even for spurring economic development inthe Philippines. It is a privilege for us to be able to play a partin this process with you all.

In conclusion, I would like to thank the organizers forinviting USAID to participate in today’s workshop. We lookforward to Settlement Weeks and the launching of thePhilippine Mediation Center. Maraming salamat po and goodday to you all.


MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION ANDANDANDANDAND THETHETHETHETHE F F F F FAMILAMILAMILAMILAMILYYYYY C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTTTTT J J J J JUDGEUDGEUDGEUDGEUDGE

JUDGE ROSALINA L. PISON

ADVOCATES FORUMS FOR CEBU (WATERFRONT HOTEL), DAVAO

(MARCO POLO HOTEL), FOR JUDGES (METROPOLITAN CLUB), LAWYERS

(METROPOLITAN CLUB), BUSINESS (COURT OF APPEALS AUDITORIUM),AND THE GOVERNMENT SECTOR (COURT OF APPEALS AUDITORIUM)

JANUARY 19, JANUARY 25, FEBRUARY 1, FEBRUARY 2,FEBRUARY 15, AND FEBRUARY 22, 2001

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION: A : A : A : A : A WWWWWONDERONDERONDERONDERONDER M M M M MEDICINEEDICINEEDICINEEDICINEEDICINE

PROSECUTOR DOMINADOR D. BORNASAL, JR.ADVOCATES FORUMS FOR DAVAO (MARCO POLO HOTEL),

FOR BUSINESS (COURT OF APPEALS AUDITORIUM),AND THE ACADEME AND NGOS (COURT OF APPEALS AUDITORIUM)

JANUARY 25, FEBRUARY 15, AND MARCH 1, 2001

Mediation and Mediation and Mediation and Mediation and Mediation and TTTTThe Fhe Fhe Fhe Fhe Familamilamilamilamily Coury Coury Coury Coury Court Jt Jt Jt Jt Judgudgudgudgudgeeeee∗∗∗∗∗

Judge Rosalina L. Pison∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗

When PHILJA called me about this afternoon’s activity, I wasinformed that I should speak about the role of mediation inthe Family Courts, but I did not imagine that I shall speakbefore this big crowd of multi-sectoral groups. It is 2:00 o’clockin the afternoon and the topic might put you to sleep, but Ishall try my best to keep you awake. I shall share with you howmediation has helped me, as a Family Court judge, attain themost effective administration of justice for the Filipino familyand children brought before us.

I am the Presiding Judge of Branch 107 of the RegionalTrial Court, Quezon City. When I assumed my duty in October1994, my caseload ranged only from 135 to 210 cases monthly.This was very manageable and I was very happy. In themeantime, on October 28, 1997, Republic Act No. 8369,establishing the Family Courts, was signed by then PresidentFidel V. Ramos. With the effectivity of the said Act, ourSupreme Court designated several Regional Trial Courts asFamily Courts preparatory to the establishment of the ‘real’Family Courts.

∗ Delivered at the Advocates Forums for Cebu (Waterfront Hotel), Davao (MarcoPolo Hotel), for Judges (Metropolitan Club), Lawyers (Metropolitan Club),Business (Court of Appeals Auditorium), and the Government Sector (Court ofAppeals Auditorium) respectively held on January 19, January 25, February 1,February 2, February 15, and February 22, 2001.

∗∗ Judge Rosalina L. Pison presides over Branch 107 of the Regional Trial Courtin Quezon City.


My branch was designated as such. Before my designation,there were seven (7) branches of the Regional Trial Courts ofQuezon City which were assigned to handle cases involving thefamily and cases wherein children were accused. Effective March2000, the Supreme Court designated only 3 of 45 branches inQuezon City to handle the said cases. The Metropolitan TrialCourts and the other four branches of the Regional Trial Courtsunloaded their cases to the three designated Regional TrialCourts. All cases covered by the Act were henceforth raffledonly to the three designated branches. My caseload increasedfrom the previous 135 to 210 cases to 700 to 900 cases everymonth. In my court, I worked very hard to attend to the bignumber of cases. It was difficult and emotionally draining.You know how it is in family relations cases; you need so muchtime to talk to the parties. Since I was the only one conferringwith the parties, my accomplishment was limited to what Icould physically attend to. I tried my best to adopt ways andmeans to expedite the process.

Sometime in June 2000, I received a letter from thePhilippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA) informing thatparticipants on family mediation would be trained on the basicsof mediation as well as special mediation skills in family cases.I was requested to submit five (5) nominees to be trained asfamily mediators.

You know, in my younger years, I worked as Deputy Clerkof Court/Hearing Commissioner of the JDRC of Manila. Itwas a pilot court and the only one in Manila. We handledthousands of cases monthly. But we were about twelve (12)hearing commissioners, all lawyers to whom then Judge CorazonAgrava referred family relations cases for conferences with the

1432002] MEDIATION AND THE FAMILY COURT JUDGE

goal of amicably settling the problems of couples. But we didnot call the process mediation; we called them conciliationconferences. I thought about my experience there. With thegreat caseload that I have been receiving and not having hearingcommissioners in the court, I thought that perhaps if I havetrained my staff to do conciliation, it would expedite the courtprocess. So, I immediately called up Dr. PurificacionQuisumbing of the PHILJA and told her about the problem.I requested that the Branch Clerks of Court, legal researchersand the social workers of the two other designated FamilyCourts in Quezon City be included as participants. And thatstarted everything. With the undersigned, my Branch Clerk ofCourt, legal researcher and two social workers attended thetraining, internship program and refresher courses.

Right after the training, I conferred with my staff and Itold them that I would avail right away of their services asmediators of the court. And since then, they have been a ‘part’of the process in my court.

So, when do I avail of their services?

The Family Courts Act enumerated the jurisdiction ofFamily Courts. In almost all cases brought before the court,whether they are civil, special proceedings and even in criminalcases, I avail of mediation as part of pre-trial.

The Family Courts have jurisdiction over petitions forannulment and nullity of marriages and dissolution of conjugalpartnership of gains. In cases like these, there are also the issuesof support, custody, property, and of course, the main issue ofnullity or annulment. Under the rules, during the pendency of


these cases, we must make provisions for these issues. At theonset of the pre-trial, I have been exposed to lawyers who arguetheir cases lengthily, which greatly delay settlement of the issues.You know how lawyers are. To avoid this, I would politely askthe parties if they are willing to be referred to a mediator. AndI am very proud that my staff, as mediators, have been trainedby the PHILJA and Ms. Annabelle Abaya. I am happy to tellyou that lawyers and parties in my court have often agreed tobe referred for mediation and are thankful for the referral.

My sala is very small. Even my staff room is very small.Actually, four of my staff have no tables to work on and sothey just share with others. So, in the beginning, my mediatorsconducted mediation in the benches on the corridors of ourHall of Justice. But surprisingly, even with the short timeavailable and want of facilities, they have been successful inassisting parties resolve the referred issues. As you know,mediation is a voluntary process in which the parties to a disputeengage the assistance of a neutral person, called the Mediator,to facilitate negotiations between them with a view of resolvingtheir dispute privately and in an amicable manner. To providethem with better ambiance for the informal process, I lookedfor a room to accommodate the mediators and litigants.Fortunately, I was able to share a room for them at theMetropolitan Trial Court Judges’ Lounge, where they nowconduct mediation. I have been trying to make the room ascomfortable as possible for couples and children. We haveprovided magazines and toys in the room to make theatmosphere more relaxed.

What did I discover from the use of mediation? I foundthat my mediators are able to apply their skills to gain the trust


and confidence of the parties such that they are able to addressthe interests of each party and put them forward in the centerof discussion for possible settlement of the dispute. With theirtraining, my mediators are better able to deal with the differentemotions prevailing at the time of discussion.

In petitions for nullity, annulment of marriages and legalseparation, I refer the issues of support of the children orspouse, custody and property for mediation. If mediationsucceeds, compromise agreements are executed on the issuesand that is when I render a partial judgment approving theagreement. If mediation fails, I confer with the mediator andask about the concern of the parties and how they behavedduring mediation. When I take over the pre-trial conferenceproper, my task becomes easy already and oftentimes I becomesuccessful in settling the issues. The issues therefore becomelimited. The remaining issues to be tackled, for example, wouldperhaps be proof of psychological incapacity in nullity casesunder Article 36 of the Family Code.

Solving the property issue takes so much time and is verydraining emotionally. With the help of mediators, discussionof property issues of spouses becomes easy. Mediators areable to assist the court by enabling the parties to identify andarrive into an agreement regarding their assets. I have availedof the services of my mediators in almost all issues confrontinghusband and wife such as contempt charges on support issues,and even motions for execution of judgments, if the partiesagree.

Now, let us talk about criminal cases. It has always beenthe practice that criminal cases are not subject to settlement.


But, as Family Court judges, we deal with children, either asaccused, witness or victim, with the over-riding concern fortheir best interests. I avail of mediation to bring peace andharmony among parties as long as the best interests of thechildren and their families demand so.

Thus, I refer criminal cases involving reckless impudenceresulting to injuries, slight physical injuries, theft and othersimple offenses for mediation. Oftentimes, the real problemsare discovered through mediation. When parties confer andcome face-to-face upon learning that there was no bad intentionon the part of the other party, peace is achieved between oramong the parties. However, although cases are settled, my jobas a Family Court judge does not end there. I apply our expertiseto assist the parties so that they shall not be involved again in asimilar situation in the future. Referrals to experts, NGOs, ordoctors for stabilization of the parties’ behavior are made andmonitored.

Thus, mediation has greatly assisted me in the casemanagement of my court. For instance:

• Mediation has shortened the proceedings. Agreementsare reached on certain issues. Actual trial therefore islimited to the issue which cannot be the subject ofcompromise/settlement;

• Mediation has assisted me in case disposals. Casesreferred to mediation are settled after 2-3 meetingswithin 1 to 3 months. The cases are either decidedbased on compromise agreements or withdrawn ordismissed. Since then, I have had more time for trialproper of cases which require full-blown trial, such as


those of detention prisoners.

• Mediation enabled me to schedule more cases in thetrial calendar. Imagine the four of us - myself, myBranch Clerk of Court and two social workers - asmediators attending to four (4) cases each and all atthe same time.

With all of these, I encourage all of you here to trymediation. As I have said, it can be used and tried in all kindsof disputes.

Thank you for listening.

Mediation: A Mediation: A Mediation: A Mediation: A Mediation: A WWWWWonder Medicineonder Medicineonder Medicineonder Medicineonder Medicine∗∗∗∗∗

Prosecutor Dominador D. Bornasal, Jr.∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗∗

Allow me to tell you about how I got involved in mediationand my experiences as a mediator.

Sometime in 1999, when I was the Clerk of Court of theRegional Trial Court of Valenzuela City, our Executive Judge,the Honorable Adriano R. Osorio, received as communicationfrom the Supreme Court, a circular designating our court asone of the pilot areas for testing mediation. That was not thefirst time that I heard about mediation. While I was studyinglaw, I read about it in the Katarungang Pambarangay Law andthe Labor Code. My understanding then of mediation wasvery simple: it is a process by which disputes between partiesare settled amicably. A mediator is a person who convinces theparties in dispute to settle their case, provides them with optionsto choose from, expresses his opinion, and gives suggestionswhich he thinks would make the parties agree to settle.

But since nobody in our court had any experience on or in-depth knowledge of mediation, I was sent to a series ofmediation training programs. As part of the training program,participants were given cases to mediate. To be candid, right

* Delivered at the Advocates Forums for Davao (Marco Polo Hotel), for Business(Court of Appeals Auditorium), and the Academe and NGOs (Court of AppealsAuditorium) respectively held on January 25, February 15, and March 1, 2001.

** Prosecutor Dominador D. Bornasal, Jr., an accredited Mediator, is from theFiscal’s Office of the Municipal Hall of Valuenzuela City

1492002] MEDIATION: A WONDER MEDICINE

then I had doubts whether mediation could help declog thecourts’ dockets in a significant way. Mediation has been triedand is being applied in labor cases and other cases cognizableby the barangay. But there are still a lot of cases that had notbeen settled and hence found their way in courts. I studied lawfor four years and know just one way of resolving disputes,through court proceedings. I have dreamt and labored tobecome a lawyer and now I am taught that the presence of alawyer is not necessary in mediation. In fact, many people thinkthat lawyers may disrupt the mediation proceeding. Somepeople even suggested that lawyers should be barred fromaccompanying their clients during mediation. Being a lawyermyself, I felt bad about such comments.

But even with that doubt in mind, I was able to successfullymediate half of the cases assigned to me. Our group ofmediators was called again for further training in mediation atthe Asian Institute of Management. This time, I was morereceptive of the lecture. I would like to improve on my 50%rating of success. I learned the different tools that a mediatorcan use. Comparing these tools with that of a carpenter, Ifound that if a carpenter has a ruler to measure the boundariesand scope of his work, the mediator has “listening” to measurethe issues involved in a case before him. If a carpenter has achisel, the mediator has “reframing” to smoothen the roughwords thrown by the litigants against each other. If a carpenterhas a plan or a sketch, the mediator summarizes both points ofthe parties to inform them objectively of what has beendiscussed so far.

With his tools, a carpenter can repair and restore damagedhouses; the mediator, with his tools, can repair and restoredamaged relationships.


From my training in mediation, my rating of succesfullymediated cases went up from 50% to 80% to 95%.

In closing, I would like to leave this message, especially tothose who doubt whether mediation can really help the courtsdeclog their dockets in a significant way. I assure you thatmediation, based on my experience, provides swift justice. Inmost cases and in just one setting, we were able to help theparties arrive at an amicable settlement even if their cases hadlagged in court for years. Mediation is like a wonder medicine:it cures the hatred, greed and even the pride of conflictingparties. I am now a believer of mediation, having seen how itworks in other people and in my own personal life.

Thank you and good day.

WWWWWRITERITERITERITERITE-U-U-U-U-UPSPSPSPSPS

SC NSC NSC NSC NSC NEARSEARSEARSEARSEARS “Z“Z“Z“Z“ZEREREREREROOOOO B B B B BAAAAACKLCKLCKLCKLCKLOGOGOGOGOG””””” OFOFOFOFOF C C C C CASESASESASESASESASES

AAAAARRRRRRRRRROOOOOYYYYYOOOOO LALALALALAUDSUDSUDSUDSUDS S S S S SUPREMEUPREMEUPREMEUPREMEUPREME C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTTTTT ONONONONON USEUSEUSEUSEUSE OFOFOFOFOF M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION ASASASASAS AAAAA TTTTTOOLOOLOOLOOLOOL

CCCCCOUROUROUROUROURTTTTT-----REFERREDREFERREDREFERREDREFERREDREFERRED M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION

TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE L L L L LADADADADADYYYYY N N N N NEEDSEEDSEEDSEEDSEEDS AAAAA F F F F FAAAAACELIFTCELIFTCELIFTCELIFTCELIFT

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION ASASASASAS AAAAA WWWWWAAAAAYYYYY OFOFOFOFOF L L L L LIFEIFEIFEIFEIFE

WWWWWHYHYHYHYHY S S S S SUEUEUEUEUE WWWWWHENHENHENHENHEN YYYYYOUOUOUOUOU C C C C CANANANANAN S S S S SETTLEETTLEETTLEETTLEETTLE?????

TTTTTHEHEHEHEHE F F F F FILIPINOILIPINOILIPINOILIPINOILIPINO WWWWWAAAAAYYYYY OFOFOFOFOF S S S S SETTLINGETTLINGETTLINGETTLINGETTLING D D D D DISPUTESISPUTESISPUTESISPUTESISPUTES

MMMMMEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION OFOFOFOFOF C C C C CASESASESASESASESASES INININININ THETHETHETHETHE C C C C COUROUROUROUROURTTTTT OFOFOFOFOF A A A A APPEALSPPEALSPPEALSPPEALSPPEALS

SC Nears SC Nears SC Nears SC Nears SC Nears “Zer“Zer“Zer“Zer“Zero Baco Baco Baco Baco Backlog”klog”klog”klog”klog” of of of of of Cases Cases Cases Cases Cases*

Public Information Office, Supreme Court

Strengthening its commitment to promote justice, the SupremeCourt has poised itself to reach its targeted “zero backlog” ofcases on or before its culminating centenary celebrations onJune 11.

“We now have almost solved our backlog,” Justice ArtemioPanganiban said during the recent Advocates Forum of theMedia on Mediation at the Linden Suites in Ortigas Center,Pasig City. There is a backlog of only 300 cases to date at theSC, he added.

Backlogged cases are those pending before the SupremeCourt beyond two years after they are submitted for the Court’sresolution, Panganiban explained.

Quoting figures of backlogs in the lower courts, he saidunclogging of court cases is “a must,” particularly under theCourt’s Judicial Reform Program.

There are 3,088 more cases filed in the Court of Appealsas against those decided in the last two years; and 33,975 morecases filed against those decided in the Regional Trial Courtsduring the same period, he said.

Meanwhile, Panganiban urged judges and clerks of courtsof selected cities nationwide to encourage among conflictingparties, in their respective salas, to avail themselves of the on-

* Published at the PIO News Bulletin, on March 21, 2001.

1532002] SC NEARS “ZERO BACKLOG” OF CASES

going Mediation Program by the Philippine Judicial Academy,the education arm of the Supreme Court.

He said cases on family disputes, except those which, bylaw, cannot be settled by compromise; civil tenancy; creditor-debtor relationship; collection; damage suits; and all civil casesthat may have a good chance of being settled at pre-trial or ontrial proper may be settled through mediation.

Mediation, the process of resolving disputes with the aidof a neutral person – the mediator – who helps parties identifyissues and develop proposals to resolve their disputes, has twoadvantages: (1) It helps declog court cases; and (2) It is a betterand more civilized solution to disputes. The Mediator acts asa facilitator for the parties to arrive at a mutually acceptablearrangement, which will be the basis for the court to render ajudgment based on a compromise.

Mediation is considered advantageous to both parties. Itis said to be effective, faster, less costly, and results in morerelationships that were once long-torn by conflicts.

“Mediation is encouraged by the Supreme Court. It willbring solutions to disputes speedily and conveniently,”Panganiban said.

ArArArArArrrrrroooooyyyyyo Lauds Supro Lauds Supro Lauds Supro Lauds Supro Lauds Supreme Coureme Coureme Coureme Coureme Court Prt Prt Prt Prt Progogogogogram onram onram onram onram onUse of MediationUse of MediationUse of MediationUse of MediationUse of Mediation

Isabel C. De Leon

President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo lauded yesterday theSupreme Court’s move to institute a judicial reform programthrough the use of mediation in the courts to make justicemore accessible, swifter, and less expensive in the country.

Speaking at the launching of the Supreme Court’s use ofmediation courts at the Manila Hotel yesterday, the Presidentsaid mediation comes with the country’s renewed consensualdemocracy. She said:

The appalling number of pending cases in the first twolevels of the judiciary reported to be close to a millioncases is finally being confronted by the horns with theprogressive and proactive stance of the leadership of theSupreme Court.

President Arroyo added that the use of mediation in thecourts would re-introduce people to the value of talking thingsover and of taking responsibility over decisions that will endtheir disputes.

“From a national perspective, a judiciary with its docketsunclogged is a more efficient instrument of democracy,” shestressed.

The Chief Executive urged the Supreme Court’s newmediators to tirelessly help people in their conflicts and possibly

∗ Published at the Manila Bulletin, on March 22, 2001.

1552002] ARROYO LAUDS SUPREME COURTON USE OF MEDIATION

transform their relationships. She also urged the people tomediate even at the barangay level before they litigate.

She expressed the solidarity of the executive branch ofgovernment with the judiciary in developing the integrated useof mediation in al areas where it is applicable. “The use ofmediation in the courts ushers in a new era in making justicemore accessible, swifter and less expensive in our country,” shesaid.

The President added that now is the time to stop the courtfrom being reduced into collection agents of industries unableto reform since 65% of all cases filed in courts are violationsof Batas Pambansa 22 or the Bouncing Check Law. She alsoencouraged business and organizations to include mediation intheir dispute resolution systems to arrest conflicts and grievancesat the roots. She said:

In the same vein, we must act concertedly in introducingmediation in our frontline services and quasi-judicialagencies to ensure that cases are settled…decisively endingthe trend of endless appeals in the courts.

The President commended the High Tribunal headed byChief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr. for maintaining the highestintegrity in the historic impeachment trial and decisivelyupholding what the People’s Court at EDSA has decided.

She said, “By maintaining its independence, the SupremeCourt has reaffirmed its mandate as the bulwark of justice.”

Mediation As A Mediation As A Mediation As A Mediation As A Mediation As A TTTTTooloolooloolool*

Opinion, Manila StandarOpinion, Manila StandarOpinion, Manila StandarOpinion, Manila StandarOpinion, Manila Standarddddd

The Supreme Court, under Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr., hasembarked with determination on a program no other HighTribunal in the past has pursued. The Davide Court is out tounclog lower court dockets of an estimated one million cases.

Davide’s Administrative Order No. 21-2001 makes pilotareas of the cities of Valenzuela, Caloocan, Manila, Makati,Pasig, Marikina, Mandaluyong, Parañaque, Las Piñas,Muntinlupa, Quezon City, Pasay, Davao, Cebu and the townof Malabon.

Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts andMunicipal Trial Courts in these localities are observing“Amicable Settlement Weeks” which began on March 26 andends on April 6 – two whole weeks within which plaintiffs anddefendants in selected cases are brought together to reachpossible agreement on ending their respective legal disputes.

RTCs, MeTCs and MTCs are assisted in this undertakingby a corps of 350 mediators who will eventually staff the soon-to-be-established Philippine Mediation Center.

While the Chief Justice anchored his Administrative Orderon Rule 18, Section 2 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure,he should rightfully take the credit for setting in motion a “cure”for the affliction that has long plagued the Philippine judicialsystem.

* Published at the Manila Standard, on April 1, 2001.

1572002] MEDIATION AS A TOOL

It usually takes years, sometimes decades, for litigants tosee an end to their agonizing wait for resolution of theircomplaints, civil or criminal.

Lower court judges have been complaining about beingmade collection agents of creditors, particularly in estafa cases.This kind of conflict between creditors and debtors will soonleave the court dockets, along with damage suits and other civilcases.

What the High Tribunal wants to happen is to avoid,whenever avoidable, the elevation of remediable cases to thehigher courts. Reducing the cases at bar in the lower courtswould mean cutting down the number of complaints reachingthe Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court itself, allowingthese higher courts to attend to more urgent cases.

This may also rid the criminal justice system of “hoodlumsin robes” who dispense justice with both eyes open to profitable”arrangements” – to the detriment of poor litigants.

Mediation will save protagonists in civil cases not only theanxiety that comes with litigation, but also the agony of waitingfor judgment day.

The guardians of the Judiciary are slowly, but surely, elevatingthe ethical standards of the legal system. If its noble intentions arenot derailed, moneyed criminals will have reason to quake in theirboots even before their cases are brought to court.

CourCourCourCourCourt-Rt-Rt-Rt-Rt-Refefefefeferererererrrrrred Mediationed Mediationed Mediationed Mediationed Mediation*

Larry Sipin

I. AMICABLE SETTLEMENT WEEKS

II. MEDIATION PROCESS

III. TO DIE FOR

IV. GREAT POTENTIAL

I. AI. AI. AI. AI. AMICABLEMICABLEMICABLEMICABLEMICABLE S S S S SETTLEMENTETTLEMENTETTLEMENTETTLEMENTETTLEMENT WWWWWEEKSEEKSEEKSEEKSEEKS

Very few are aware that the period 25 March to 6 April hasbeen declared by the Supreme Court as Amicable SettlementWeeks.

Likewise, very few are aware that this year is the centennialyear of the Supreme Court.

Among the impact activities of the year-long SupremeCourt Centennial is the Amicable Settlement Weeks.

In an administrative order, Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide,Jr. directed Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts,and Municipal Trial Courts in Metro Manila, in the cities ofDavao and Cebu, “to test the efficiency of court-referredmediation as an alternative mode of resolution of disputes filedin courts.”

The tribunal directed the judges to conduct an inventoryof the cases in their dockets and select at least twenty (20)cases to be referred for “alternative dispute resolution” or ADR.Mediation from the Philippine Judicial Academy, an adjunct

* Published at the Manila Standard,on April 2, 2001.

1592002] COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION

of the Supreme Court, were dispersed to participating salas tosteer the selected cases, which otherwise would drag on and on,to speedy out-of-court settlement.

The idea is to help unclog the judicial backlog.

This experiment on amicable settlement is yet anothercontribution of the Davide Court toward a more efficient andresponsive Judiciary which, too bad, only a few are aware of. Icame to know about it only because a libel suit I faced beforethe Quezon City Regional Trial Court was selected as one ofthe test cases for court-referred mediation.

II. MII. MII. MII. MII. MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION P P P P PRRRRROCESSOCESSOCESSOCESSOCESS

I faced a multi-million peso libel suit courtesy of the Chamberof Real Estate and Builders Association (CREBA), itsChairman, Manuel Serrano, and its President, Jaime Cura.

The case stemmed from columns I wrote regarding allegedhousing and construction industry-related tax fraud.

The mediation process brought me and Manuel Serranoface to face. Actually, I should have faced off with Cura becauseit was the CREBA president, not its Chairman, who bore thebrunt of the pieces that led to the libel suit. Ideally, it shouldhave been Serrano and my buddy and co-defendant, formerManila Standard business editor and columnist Butch delCastillo, whose line of fire in a column, which was directed atthe CREBA Chairman, caused him to be included in the case.But the summons were not served on Butch, who has resignedfrom Standard. Cura also did not show up. I understand thathe was out of town, in Tuguegarao, campaigning for CREBA,which was vying for a partylist congressional seat.


So, myself and Manuel Serrano ended up in…well, eachother’s arms.

III. III. III. III. III. TTTTTOOOOO D D D D DIEIEIEIEIE F F F F FOROROROROR

The case is far from amicably settled, but the first session withthe mediator was fruitful.

At least, I got to meet and hear out Serrano who, beingCREBA chairman, said he could speak for and in behalf of theorganization and its President.

Serrano said that most important to him was personalhonor. He served notice that where he came from – that wouldbe Batangas – honor was to die for.

He said his honor had been desecrated, bewailing that allcrimes, save for murder, were imputed on him. While I did notwrite anything about Serrano, my erstwhile fellow Standardcolumnist Butch del Castillo did, to wit:

But who is this Manuel Serrano, who said to be the group’s(CREBA’s) Chairman? Is he the same Manuel Serrano whostands charged with a variety of crimes which include estafa,illegal recruitment, falsification of public documents, non-delivery of title and violation of the Social Securty Act?We’re just asking, of course. We could be referring toanother Manuel Serrano.

Incidentally, there is another Manuel Serrano. CREBA’sSerrano had acknowledged, saying at one time, that his requestfor a clearance from the National Bureau of Investigation wasdelayed because of the unsavory record of another man namedManuel Serrano.

At any rate, he said he could not be dissociated from whatI wrote about Cura and CREBA because, being CREBA

1612002] COURT-REFERRED MEDIATION

Chairman, he was as much, if not more so, a responsible officialof the organization as CREBA President Cura.

“There was no scam,” declared Serrano.

The statements and the charges I raised in my columnswere “not correct,” he said.

In a statement provided to some newspapers at the heightof the controversy, CREBA branded as “false and baselessdiversionary tactics” the reports on the alleged tax scam.

CREBA raised three major points:

1. There was nothing illegal in the continued issuance oftax discount certificates, particularly to non-developermembers such as build-and-sell operators because thesewere “habitually engaged” in the real estate business;

2. There was no way the certification process could beused by CREBA or its members to defraud thegovernment;

3. The government did not lose money from the reducedrates because it was not a final tax, but merely an advancepayment.

CREBA said, “The baseless accusations were designed toimpugn CREBA’s 27-year reputation of integrity andcredibility.”

The meeting ended with CREBA and this newspaperagreeing to continue to explore possibilities and avenues to bringthe case to an amicable settlement.


IVIVIVIVIV. G. G. G. G. GREAREAREAREAREATTTTT P P P P POOOOOTENTIALTENTIALTENTIALTENTIALTENTIAL

Where will this lead to?

It’s either going to lead to an out-of-court settlement ofthe case, or the case could continue to run the course of thesystem through its judicial conclusion. But whichever way itgoes, at least the parties have talked and tried to understandeach other.

I must admit that there was tension at first. I thought thatinitially, Serrano came on a bit too strong, and for my part, Imay have been a mite too cocky. But I think we got to be moreor less quite comfortable with each other’s openness as ourmeeting wore on.

There’s still a very long way to go before me and ManuelSerrano and Jaime Cura kiss and make up. As a matter of fact,me and Serrano did not even shake hands when our meetingadjourned. But I think we’ll do that in our next meeting. Why,me and my former neighbor Jaime Cura could even getneighborly again, huh, Congressman Jimmy?

From what I experienced in my meeting with ManuelSerrano, this experimental mediation system has great potential.I mean it, really, is enlightening when the parties to a caseconfront each other, not coming from adversarial positions,but with open minds at settling the issue soonest.

It’s just too bad that “Amicable Settlement Weeks” end onFriday, April 6. I hope we can come to terms, but I’m afraid thetime frame is simply too stiff.

Why don’t they extend “Amicable Settlement Weeks” toforever?

TTTTThe Ladhe Ladhe Ladhe Ladhe Lady Needs A Fy Needs A Fy Needs A Fy Needs A Fy Needs A Faceliftaceliftaceliftaceliftacelift*

Jullie Yap Daza

Time and tide wait for no man. In this country, in this newcentury, only the law waits, and waits, for justice to be done.

The backlog of court cases is an intimidating turn-off tojudges, litigants, and especially defendants wrongfully charged.If the reader has visited any court in Manila or a town or cityoutside the capital, he would be horrified at the state our justicesystem is in. Twenty years or twenty days ago, the situation hasnot changed.

It’s not only the slow, grinding pace of litigation, it’s alsothe “look” of our courts, which are but a mirror of a systemthat harbors delays, dark and dingy corners into which thelight of honor does not want to shine, and the dust thataccumulates, not into history but willful, patient negligence.Piles of files of court documents litter the corridors, sharingspace with sleeping men and women – at one o’clock in theafternoon – who have been exhausted by legal proceedings thatwould be better described as illegal.

One look at a typical courtroom and the taxpayer has towonder. Is this where my taxes go in the pursuit of justice topunish the guilty and free the innocent? If this is how we treatthe legal system, what can be illegal?

***

* Published in the column, Medium Rare, Manila Standard, on April 6, 2001.


Without fanfare, the Supreme Court is carrying out anexperiment to lighten the load of cases piling up in the municipaland regional trial courts. The project is called mediation, apre-trial arrangement where the litigants, appearing with orwithout counsel, come face to face to decide if they really intendto go the whole hog of an expensive trial where only their lawyersstand to gain, win or lose.

It’s a baby of Chief Justice Hilario Davide, and the babywill be baptized this afternoon at the Citibank Tower in Makati.Three hundred and fifty (350) mediators were trained for theexperiment, a process designed to short-cut the longer, moretedious and expensive ritual called going to court. The casespicked for mediation are normally civil in nature and, in keepingwith human nature, have to do with matters involving money –inheritance, failed business transactions, breach of contract, etc.

Although the Philippine Mediation Center is a new office,it’s an old concept, the very same idea behind the barangaycourts where quarreling neighbors let it all hang out before a“referee,” in the person of the barangay captain or some suchresponsible, neutral person, to resolve their differences.

Barangay courts are predictably the scene of hair-pullingand screaming exchanges of invectives and colorfully graphiccurses in the vernacular, but that’s because the source of thedisagreements is rooted in neighborliness and the lack of it.As the Mediation Center is only a month old, there is as yet nobasis for predicting similar displays of raw emotion andpsychological stress when the two parties meet to decide ifthey want to end the aggravation that brought them togetherin the first place, or to pursue the case to its conclusion.

1652002] THE LADY NEEDS A FACELIFT

The mediator appointed by the court takes the place ofthe judge. He or she listens to the two sides, advises them onthe options available and, whenever but as soon as possible, likeone week, draws up an agreement. If both sides find itacceptable, the prosecutor (fiscal) is informed, likewise the judgeto whom the case was assigned, thereby saving the court time,manpower, and resources, including electricity to fuel the ceilingfans, stenographer’s notes, and documentation of papers thatwould only add to the litter in the steel cabinets, on the floor,or under the staircase.

***

When I was summoned to appear at the Quezon City Hallof Justice recently, I was told that I was “lucky” because thecourt is “new” being only five or six years old.

It may be “new,” but it looked like a hundred years old,with none of the glowing patina of a lovingly cared-for antique.

Two years ago when I did a short feature on marriageannulments for an episode on my TV show, my staff pickedthe Pasig City court because it was supposed to be thehandsomest hereabouts, according to research done by ourlocation coordinator.

Well, I was not only disappointed, I was saddened at thesight. The court looked better outside than inside. Inside, itwas as gloomy as a warehouse. Perhaps something has beendone to spruce up the court since that visit, but then again,perhaps not.

At the mediation in the QC courthouse where I met thetwo gentlemen on the opposite side, we agreed wholeheartedlyon at least one thing: “This is how justice is symbolized in ourcountry.”


One of the gentlemen could not help himself. He quipped:“We should ask Fred Benipayo how he let this happen.”

Fred Benipayo was Court Administrator in charge of allcourts except the Supreme Court until he was appointed tohead COMELEC last February.

Mediation As A Mediation As A Mediation As A Mediation As A Mediation As A WWWWWaaaaay ofy ofy ofy ofy of Lif Lif Lif Lif Lifeeeee*

Felipe B. Miranda

Many contentious disputes arise in societies where citizens arenot committed to habitually observing the rule of law andinstead treat it as a matter of personal convenience. When onefeels like it, one stops before a red light. When the fancy catchessomeone, he or she dips into public funds. And when theopportunity presents itself, the rich – much like the poor –think nothing of illegally taking over somebody else’s property.

In such societies, the formal institutions for resolvingconflict and settling disputes suffer gross overloading. Socialstress builds up as contending parties try to settle theirdifferences by whatever available means and – lackingappropriate mechanisms for resolving these differences fastenough – greater instability in the social system results.

In the Philippines, far too many cases clog the court docketsat all levels of the Judiciary. Civil cases, in particular, drag onfor decades, with the original parties having died and theirchildren and grandchildren having to pursue elusive justice acrossseveral generations. Criminal cases may not take as long to beresolved but still take enough time to warrant the maxim,“Justice delayed is justice denied.”

In addition to failed socialization into the idea and practiceof the rule of law, other reasons have been explored to explain

* Published in the column, Chasing the Wind, The Philippine Star, on April 8and 9, 2001.

168 THE JUDICIAL JOURNAL [VOL. 4:11

the massive load of the judicial system in the Philippines.Ineptness and corruption among many of the judicialauthorities, intervention in the judicial process by powerful andinfluential political actors, incompetence and lack of ethicsamong the lawyers, widespread legal ignorance among thecitizenry, inadequacy of public funds for running a decentjudicial establishment have all been cited at one time or anotherto explain the sorry state of the machinery for dispensing justicein the Philippines.

Still unable to address the root causes of inefficiency andcorruption in the Judiciary, the Philippine Supreme Court hasnevertheless started to do something about the problem. In additionto efforts to document the nature and extent of its crucial problemsin judicial administration, it has also been trying to actively facilitatethe rate of judicial disposition by resorting to court-supervised,but largely extrajudicial, means of dispute settlement.

Pending cases amenable to mediation are given a boost withthe courts requiring the parties involved to meet with a trainedmediator to find out whether they could forge a compromiseagreement. During this mediation session, nothing said by theparties, no information gained in whatever way, may be laterused by either party should the mediation fail and the regulartrial of the case is resumed. For the period during whichmediation might be pursued, all court hearings of the case aresuspended.

If the parties can reach a settlement during this mediationsession, the mediator will help prepare with their respectivecounsels the formal document whose provisions will bind bothparties. This document and its provisions will also guide thejudge in his final action formally terminating the case.

1692002] MEDIATION AS A WAY OF LIFE

During the mediation, the mediator’s own sense of fairnessand well-developed skills in interpersonal affairs define whetherthe mediation will succeed or not. Without passing judgmenton whether the plaintiff ’s or the defendant’s side of the case isthe more truthful or the better one, the mediator tries to activatein both parties a basic sense of concern or sympathy for theother person – a sense that might have been much impaired byfeelings of bitterness due to imagined or real hurt inflicted bythe other party.

Most of the time, the mediator has to be a consummatepsychologist – not necessarily a psychiatrist – knowing preciselywhen to allow a person to unburden himself of his anger or hispain and when to check the same person who might unwittinglycross the threshold of decent public discourse or personalexposure.

If the mediator is able to establish himself or herself as afair, caring person, then the litigants find it easier to entertainother more rational considerations for reaching a compromise.The parties are more vulnerable to reflecting on the inordinatelylong process of judicial trial, the costliness of legal and otherincidental fees, the hassle of court appearances, and even thesobering prospects of not securing what they had gone to courtfor at the end of a long and costly trial.

And so, with excellent mediating, what started as apparentlyirreconcilable interests move closer to each other and soon getclose enough to reach to each other. Mediation, in thesecircumstances, is a natural mode of conflict defusion amongbasically decent Filipinos.

Given enough recognition and more substantial institutionalsupport, mediators can help tremendously in decreasing the huge

170 THE JUDICIAL JOURNAL [VOL. 4:11

backlog of cases pending before the courts. Furthermore, bymaking the workload of judges more bearable, mediators canhelp the latter focus on the truly more demanding, sophisticatedcourt cases. Less harried, more focused, presumably competentjudges will make better decisions and the overall quality ofadministered justice would, of course, improve.

Mediation is an inspired idea. To date, even with less thanideal resource support, it is already proving its great worth.

Like any good system, it can, of course, be tremendouslyimproved.

Among the first improvements – in acknowledgement ofthe critical contributions that competent and dedicatedmediators can make to judicial administration in this country– is to make mediators not simply uncompensated amicus curiaevolunteers, providing critical public service pro bono. Surely,they deserve to be justly compensated, especially those mediatorswhose own material conditions may not permit donating theirpublic service indefinitely.

Also, with just compensation, mediators can hew better to acode of conduct currently barring them from allowing evenappreciative – erstwhile hostile – litigants to treat them to even asimple lunch after a mediation session has successfully concluded.

WWWWWhhhhhy Sue y Sue y Sue y Sue y Sue WWWWWhen hen hen hen hen YYYYYou Can Settle?ou Can Settle?ou Can Settle?ou Can Settle?ou Can Settle?Mediation OfMediation OfMediation OfMediation OfMediation Offffffererererered As Best Altered As Best Altered As Best Altered As Best Altered As Best Alternatinatinatinatinativvvvve e e e e TTTTTooooo

CostlCostlCostlCostlCostly Litigy Litigy Litigy Litigy Litigationationationationation*

Maricar Jara-Puyod

I. PHILIPPINE MEDIATION CENTER

II. JUDGE’S ROLE

III. HAZARDOUS WORK

I. PI. PI. PI. PI. PHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINEHILIPPINE M M M M MEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIAEDIATIONTIONTIONTIONTION C C C C CENTERENTERENTERENTERENTER

Chief Justice Hilario Davide dreams of the day when therewill be no cases in court.

Impossible? Not really, as court cases can now be resolvedexpeditiously and inexpensively through mediation.

This is the most recent development in the country’s judicialsystem when the Supreme Court and its education arm, thePhilippine Judicial Academy (PHILJA), recently launched thePhilippine Mediation Center (PMC) in Makati City.

The idea is to unclog all municipal and regional trial courts,as well as the appellate court and the Supreme Court of allpending cases and resolve these amicably between litigants viathe intercession of trained mediators, retired justice andPHILJA Chancellor Ameurfina Melencio Herrera said.

This alternative mode of dispensing justice will give partiesin conflict a quick and fair resolution of their cases and help

∗ Published at the Manila Standard, on April 10, 2001.

172 THE PHILA JUDICIAL JOURNAL [VOL. 4:11

judges spend more time and improve their verdict on morecomplicated cases.

A study in 1999 showed some 3,000 undecided or pendingcases before the Supreme Court. Total undecided cases is in excessof one million, including those which have been archived.

There are various reasons for these such as the delayingtactics employed by either one or both of the litigants. Or,this could also be due to the lack of presiding judges to hearthese cases due to sickness and death, plus the unavailability ofqualified applicants to vacated salas.

Annabelle Abaya, PHILJA consultant on the mediationtraining and procedures, who earned her masters degree inmediation resolution at the University of Massachusetts,explained mediation of court cases will come in when thelitigants themselves come up with a compromise agreementabout their want to settle their dispute amicably.

II. JII. JII. JII. JII. JUDGEUDGEUDGEUDGEUDGE’’’’’SSSSS R R R R ROLEOLEOLEOLEOLE

The final decision about this will have to come from thePresiding Judge himself who will have to issue an order. Whenreferred to mediation proceedings, the litigants, together withtheir respective counsels, will have to appear before a trainedmediator who will hear both sides of the case and assist inresolving it peacefully.

Court cases referred to mediation proceedings range fromconflicts involving money, family and community disagreements,and settlement of estate properties, Abaya said.

So far, since last year, when PHILJA’s training of mediatorsbegan, there have been 1,001 court cases settled throughmediation out of 3,880 cases referred, 2,216 were returned to

1732002] WHY SUE WHEN YOU CAN SETTLE?

court for further litigation due to such reasons as theuncooperativeness of the litigants’ lawyers. There are also 763cases still pending.

Pilot areas are Metro Manila, Cebu City and Davao City.

It is estimated that the government saved at least P29.6million since expenses amounted to about P35,000 per casefor the 1,001 cases settled through mediation.

Qualified to be mediators are college graduates, at least 30years old, who must pass a series of tests that will determinetheir patience, resiliency, and creativity in solving cases.Successful applicants undergo a three-day basic mediationtraining and one-month internship in trial courts.

III. HIII. HIII. HIII. HIII. HAZARDOUSAZARDOUSAZARDOUSAZARDOUSAZARDOUS WWWWWORKORKORKORKORK

She pointed out that mediators have to have the stamina tohear and decide on cases as the work is a hazardous one.

At the launch, Abaya mentioned that one of the first 362mediators, Dr. Charlie Cruz of Cebu City, died on the way tothe hospital. He was mediating a case that day. There was alsoa mediator who suffered a nervous breakdown.

The first 362 volunteer mediators are composed ofemployees, businessmen, policemen, teachers, and showbizpersonalities, Abaya said.

She called for an awareness campaign about the program asunresolved cases were due to the uncooperativeness andclosemindedness of the people involved, including lawyers.

Davide lauded the establishment of the PMC saying: “Thatday will be a beautiful day when there will be no cases in court.”


He said mediation which works very well in other countriesshould also be applied here, citing the lost working hours andmoney spent in dispute which could be settled amicably.

He cited the case of Philippine Airlines whose case against acompany was decided only in March 1996 or six years after itwas docketed in the courts. It was a “mundane case,” he said,noting that the case of the conflict was only the airline oven.

TTTTThe Filipino he Filipino he Filipino he Filipino he Filipino WWWWWaaaaay ofy ofy ofy ofy of Settling Disputes Settling Disputes Settling Disputes Settling Disputes Settling Disputes*

Fred Dela Rosa

Filipinos have their favorite ways of settling disputes. Usapanglalake (man talk) means an attempt to reach some kind ofgentleman’s agreement to settle a spat.

Many Pinoys also take the law into their own hands.Citizens try to secure satisfaction by force or personal actionbecause they get no action from the police or because theycannot get justice from the courts. Many mete punishment ontheir own responsibility because they get shabby treatment fromlawyers or indifference from fiscals or prosecutors.

Taking the law into one’s hands has launched family feudsall over the land. Vendettas have become a way of life in manycommunities as each succeeding generation picks up the cudgelsfor its forebears.

The more reasonable say, “Pag-uusapang ma-bote,” whichactually means a problem could be settled with a bribe or aninducement, in this case a bottle (bote) or booze. Offer me abottle, cash or gift and your case is closed.

Disputes among family members and neighbors may beelevated to the head of the family or a community elder forconciliation.

However, an indifferent superior or a person in authoritymay advise warring subordinates to talk the problem out among

∗ Published at the Manila Times, on April 8, 2001.


themselves. He is also likely to say, “Ayusin ninyo iyan (Fix ityourselves).”

Former president Estrada had that advise to give whenconfronted with the quarrel between two close friends, IlocosSur Governor Luis “Chavit” Singson and first friend Charlie“Atong” Ang over the impending demise of jueteng in IlocosSur and its substitution by a new form of gambling called BingoTwo Ball. Jueteng was Singson’s livelihood, but Ang wanted tokill it with his own gimmick.

Had Estrada taken an immediate personal interest in thedispute, or taken time right away to analyze the dispute andforeseen its fallout, Singson might have been appeased and Erapmight still be in power.

It’s one of the great “what ifs” of our time.

We have barangay justice where the barangay captain talksto the quarreling neighbors and tries to bring community peace.

In labor disputes, the government has tried everything fromcompulsory arbitration to appeals to the higher courts. TheConstitution suggests a range of options, including voluntaryarbitration, mediation and conciliation, and other voluntaryways of addressing industrial strife.

The judicial system is the court of popular resort. Butmany Filipinos are unhappy with the judicial system becausecorruption is widespread, favoritism is rampant, and the poorhave difficulty getting justice. Cases stretch for eons.

Many of the accused are jailed for the wrong reason.

Now comes a promising option to compulsory arbitrationand court litigation: the concept of conciliation or mediation.

1772002] THE FILIPINO WAY OF SETTLING DISPUTES

Last Friday, Justice Hilario Davide’s Supreme Courtlaunched the Philippine Mediation Center, a brainchild of thePhilippine Judicial Academy, the court’s educational arm.

Mediation is a process by which two parties involved workout their differences in the presence of a trained mediator. Theidea is to unclog all municipal and regional trial courts, theappeals court and the Supreme Court of pending cases.

At the root of mediation is the element of trust – trust inthe mediator and his judgment, trust that earnest usapan willmake the combatants see eye to eye. The system calls for goodfaith among the disputants.

According to a Supreme Court press release, a person spendsat least P35,000 for litigation. A trial may take years, forcing acitizen to sell his possessions. When the parties find their casewoefully sticky, they may want to settle their dispute amicablywith the help of a mediator.

Mediation is a cheaper option. It takes a shorter time,sometimes hours or days, with the mediator refereeing thedispute. A mediator’s findings are referred to a judge. Thejudge promulgates a decision binding on all parties.

What disputes make good cases? Quarrels among siblingsover the properties left by parents who died intestate. Settlementof debts and collection of money. Quarrels over bouncingchecks. Family and community disagreements.

The PMC has at least 400 mediators. Since the systemstarted nine months ago, mediators have settled 1,001 casesout of 3,880 cases referred to them. That saved governmentabout Php29 million.


Mediators are not paid for their work. They are equivalentof lawyers who perform pro bono service. It is an army ofvolunteers, akin to a legal Peace Corps.

The Philippine Mediation Center is accepting volunteerswho will undergo a three-day seminar and thirty (30) days oftraining. They should be at least 30 years old, college graduates,“patient with good character and willing to work for free.”

Annabelle Abaya, PHILJA consultant, said they want to“institutionalize” mediation as “part of the justice system.”Many compañeros will not like the idea.

The system may kill all the lawyers.

If the plan works, mediation will revolutionize the justicesystem.

Mediation of CasesMediation of CasesMediation of CasesMediation of CasesMediation of Casesin the Courin the Courin the Courin the Courin the Court oft oft oft oft of A A A A Appealsppealsppealsppealsppeals∗∗∗∗∗

AttyAttyAttyAttyAtty. F. F. F. F. Francis Limrancis Limrancis Limrancis Limrancis Lim∗∗∗∗∗ ∗∗∗∗∗

Almost two years ago, I wrote about mediation and batted forits adoption as a means of resolving disputes (TTTTThe Philippinehe Philippinehe Philippinehe Philippinehe PhilippineSTSTSTSTSTARARARARAR, Aug. 8, 2000, p. 22). For the first-time readers,mediation is a voluntary process in which parties to a disputeengage the assistance of a neutral third person (mediator) tofacilitate negotiations for amicable settlement of their dispute.The aim of mediation is to strike an amicable settlementbetween the parties. Mediation is distinguished from negotiationwhere the parties themselves amicably resolve their differenceswithout the intervention of a third party. It is different fromconciliation where the conciliator can give his views on themerits of the dispute and actively suggest solutions to theproblem. A mediator is a neutral person whose role is not tosay who is right or wrong, but finds what the real interests ofthe parties are in an effort to assist them amicably settle theirdispute. It is different from arbitration where a third person(arbitrator) is mandated to give a decision (arbitral award) onwho of the parties is right or wrong.

I then proposed the establishment of a PhilippineMediation Center. I made the proposal because the pilot testof mediation conducted under the auspices of the PhilippineJudicial Academy (PHILJA) showed promising results. The

* Published at the The Philippine STAR, on July 16, 2002.

** The author is a senior partner of the Abello Concepcion Regala & Cruz LawOffices or ACCRALAW , and teaches Arbitration in the Ateneo Law School.


success rate of the pilot test was about 42 percent. Thereafter,the Supreme Court formally adopted mediation as part of ourjudicial system. A Mediation Center was established in RegionalTrial Courts in key areas of the country. Statistics show thatthe program has a success rate of 80 percent. In other words,for every 10 cases referred to mediation, the parties were ableto strike a compromise in eight cases. That indeed is a veryencouraging result.

So encouraging is the result that the Supreme Court hasauthorized a pilot test for mediation of cases pending with theCourt of Appeals (see, en banc resolution promulgated in A.M.No. 02-2-17-SC issued on April 2002). A month of the year(September 2002) was set aside as Settlement Month for thepurpose of pilot-testing the efficacy of mediation for settlingcases in the Court of Appeals.

The pilot test covers practically all cases involving partiescoming from the National Capital Region, Regions III and IV.The programs covers:

a. Civil cases brought on ordinary appeal, except thosewhere no appellant’s brief or memoranda in the lowercourt was filed;

b. Labor cases;

c. Special civil actions, and

d. Other cases, e.g., high impact economic cases.

Excluded from the pilot tests are:

a. Criminal cases;

b. Habeas corpus cases, and

1812002] MEDIATION OF CASESIN THE COURT OF APPEALS

c. cases with pending application for restraining orders/preliminary injunctions, unless the parties consent tomediation.

Under the program, each justice of the Court of Appealsshall select one case for each category of the covered cases. Thejustice, with the concurrence of the other members of thedivision, shall issue a resolution directing the parties to appearbefore the concerned division of the Court of Appeals toconsider the possibility of mediation. If the parties so agree,the court shall issue a resolution to mediate and refer the caseto the Philippine Mediation Center. To give the prospectivemediator an idea of the case, the referral shall include the appealbriefs (or memoranda if no appeal briefs had been filled), aswell as the decision or orders of the lower court/tribunal beingappealed.

The case shall be mediated during the Settlement Month.The parties shall be required to attend. Individual party litigantsare required to attend all mediation conferences in person.Corporate litigants shall attend the mediation conferencesthrough a representative duly authorized to enter into anamicable settlement. The appellate proceedings shall besuspended from the date the Court of Appeals issues theresolution to mediate until the end of the Settlement Month.

The mediation proceedings shall be presided by a mediatorchosen by the parties. In this regard, there will be a list ofaccredited mediators composed of retired justices and judges,senior members of the bar and senior law professors, who willbe trained for the purpose. The chosen mediator is required todisclose any circumstance that may create or give the appearanceof conflict of interest or any circumstance that may raise aquestion as to the mediator’s impartiality. The mediator shall


have full discretion in the conduct of mediation, including themanner and flow of discussions, as well as the calling ofcaucuses.

To encourage full disclosure by the parties, the SupremeCourt has provided that all matters discussed, communicationsmade and documents presented during the mediationconferences shall be privileged and confidential, and the sameshall be inadmissible as evidence for any purpose in any otherproceeding.

The mediator shall endeavor to complete the mediationwithin the Settlement Month. If significant progress towardsettlement has been achieved and extension of time to mediatewill most likely result in a successful settlement of the case, theCourt of Appeals, upon joint motion, may grant an extensionfor the period not exceeding thirty (30) days. If an amicablesettlement is reached, the court shall render a judgment basedon the compromise agreement. Upon promulgation of suchjudgment, the Division Clerk of Court shall issue an entry ofjudgment and remand the case to the court of origin forexecution of judgment.

Mediation of cases pending with the Court of Appeals issomething novel in alternative dispute resolution. While it is atall order, this new program is definitely a bold step in theright direction. It will not only speed up the resolution of caseslong pending with the Court of Appeals, but will also helpdecongest our court system. The net effect will be an improveddelivery of justice. It will thus help restore the confidence ofthe public in our judicial system. It is by all means a testamentto the Supreme Court’s resolute will to improve the dispensationof justice - something that we, as a nation, badly need in thesetrying times.

philja.judiciary.gov.phphilja.judiciary.gov.ph/files/journal/vol4issue11.pdf · attorney ismael g....

Documents