Introduction

In the Philippines, the barangay justice system, known as Katarungang Pambarangay, serves as a cornerstone of alternative dispute resolution at the grassroots level. It aims to promote amicable settlement of disputes among community members without resorting to formal court proceedings, thereby decongesting the judiciary and fostering harmony. A key element of this system is the requirement for conciliation or mediation before certain cases can be elevated to court. When these efforts fail, a Certificate to File Action (CTFA) is issued, allowing the complainant to pursue the matter in the appropriate judicial or administrative body.

The question of how many barangay hearings are required before issuing a CTFA is central to understanding the procedural rigor of this system. However, the law does not prescribe a fixed number of hearings; instead, it emphasizes a time-bound process focused on achieving settlement. This article explores the legal framework, procedural steps, conditions for issuing the CTFA, exceptions, and practical considerations, providing a comprehensive overview within the Philippine context.

Legal Basis

The Katarungang Pambarangay is governed primarily by Republic Act No. 7160, otherwise known as the Local Government Code of 1991 (LGC), specifically Title One, Chapter 7 (Sections 398 to 422). This law institutionalizes the Lupong Tagapamayapa (Lupon), a body chaired by the Punong Barangay (Barangay Captain), responsible for administering justice at the barangay level.

Supplementary rules are found in the Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law (as amended by Republic Act No. 8128) and implementing guidelines from the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG), such as Memorandum Circulars. The system draws from indigenous dispute resolution practices and aligns with the constitutional mandate under Article XIII, Section 11 of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which encourages the use of conciliation in settling disputes.

The CTFA, as defined under Section 417 of the LGC, is a certification that no settlement was reached despite compliance with the required conciliation procedures. It is a prerequisite for filing certain civil and criminal complaints in court, ensuring that barangay-level resolution has been exhausted.

Scope and Jurisdiction

The Katarungang Pambarangay applies to disputes involving actual residents of the same barangay or adjoining barangays. Its jurisdiction covers:

Civil disputes where the amount involved does not exceed PHP 5,000 (in Metro Manila, PHP 10,000).
Criminal offenses punishable by imprisonment not exceeding one year or a fine not exceeding PHP 5,000.
Common examples include simple debts, property disputes, slight physical injuries, alarms and scandals, and slander.

Exemptions from mandatory barangay conciliation include:

Disputes involving the government or public officers in their official capacity.
Offenses with a maximum penalty of imprisonment exceeding one year or a fine over PHP 5,000.
Cases where there is no private offended party (e.g., victimless crimes).
Real property disputes where the property is located in different cities or municipalities (unless parties agree otherwise).
Labor disputes under the Labor Code.
Actions to annul judgments.
Cases requiring urgent legal action, such as habeas corpus or those involving imminent danger.

In these exempt cases, no CTFA is required, and parties may proceed directly to court or the relevant agency.

Procedural Steps in the Katarungang Pambarangay

The process is designed to be informal, speedy, and inexpensive, with no lawyers allowed during proceedings (though they may advise outside). Here is a step-by-step breakdown:

1. Filing of the Complaint

The complainant files a written or oral complaint with the Punong Barangay or Lupon Secretary.
A filing fee may be charged, not exceeding PHP 500, unless waived for indigents.
The complaint must be filed within the prescriptive period for the action (e.g., 10 years for written contracts under the Civil Code).

2. Issuance of Summons

Within one day of filing, the Punong Barangay issues a summons requiring the respondent to appear for conciliation.
The summons is served personally or by substituted service (e.g., leaving with a household member).
If the respondent resides in another barangay, service may involve the Punong Barangay of that area or law enforcement.
Failure to appear after the first summons leads to a second summons. Willful non-appearance after the second summons allows the issuance of a CTFA immediately, treating it as a failure to settle.

3. Conciliation by the Punong Barangay

The initial stage involves a conciliation session presided over by the Punong Barangay.
Parties are encouraged to discuss and reach an amicable settlement.
This stage typically involves one or more informal meetings, but there is no fixed number; the focus is on facilitating dialogue.
If settlement is reached, an Amicable Settlement Agreement is executed, which has the force of a court judgment and is immediately executory.
If no settlement occurs within 15 days from the first appearance (extendable if necessary), the matter is referred to the Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo.

4. Formation and Proceedings of the Pangkat ng Tagapagkasundo

The Pangkat is a conciliation panel of three members selected from the Lupon, chosen by the parties or by lot if they cannot agree.
The Pangkat issues its own summons for the parties to appear.
Proceedings before the Pangkat are more structured but still informal, allowing for mediation, conciliation, or arbitration (if parties agree to the latter).
The Pangkat has 15 days from the first meeting to effect a settlement, extendable by another 15 days upon request.
During this period, the Pangkat may conduct as many hearings as necessary to explore settlement options. Hearings are held in public or private, depending on sensitivity, and parties may present evidence or witnesses.
There is no mandatory minimum or maximum number of hearings; it depends on the complexity of the dispute and the parties' willingness to negotiate. In simple cases, one hearing may suffice; in contentious ones, multiple sessions (e.g., 2-5) may occur within the timeframe.
If arbitration is chosen, the Pangkat renders an award, which is binding like a court decision.

5. Issuance of the Certificate to File Action (CTFA)

If no settlement or arbitration award is reached within the prescribed period, the Lupon Chairman (Punong Barangay) instructs the Lupon Secretary to issue the CTFA.
The CTFA certifies that conciliation efforts were undertaken but failed, or that the respondent willfully failed to appear.
It must be issued within five days after the expiration of the conciliation period.
The CTFA is attached to the complaint when filing in court; without it, the case may be dismissed for non-compliance with the barangay conciliation requirement.

Determining the Number of Hearings

The core inquiry—how many barangay hearings are required before issuing a CTFA—does not yield a numerical answer under the law. The LGC emphasizes process over quantity:

At the Punong Barangay level, conciliation may involve one or more sessions, but failure triggers referral to the Pangkat.
At the Pangkat level, hearings are held as needed within 15-30 days.
In total, the entire process must conclude within 60 days from filing, unless extended.

In practice, based on DILG guidelines and common barangay operations:

Simple disputes often resolve in 1-2 hearings (one at each stage).
Complex cases may require 3-5 hearings across both stages.
If a party fails to appear twice, no further hearings are needed, and CTFA is issued promptly.
The system prioritizes settlement over rigid scheduling, allowing flexibility to accommodate parties' availability.

Non-appearance or repudiation of settlement can also lead to CTFA issuance without additional hearings. For instance, if a party repudiates the settlement within 10 days (the cooling-off period), the process may restart or proceed to CTFA.

Enforcement and Remedies

Amicable settlements or arbitration awards are enforceable like final judgments and can be executed through the barangay or court.
Failure to comply with a settlement may result in contempt or separate actions.
Parties aggrieved by the process (e.g., due to bias) may seek remedies like repudiation or court intervention, but the CTFA itself is generally not appealable.
Violations of the procedure by barangay officials can lead to administrative sanctions under the LGC.

Practical Considerations and Challenges

In implementation, challenges include:

Delays due to overloaded Lupons or uncooperative parties.
Lack of training for Lupon members, leading to inconsistent practices.
Urban vs. rural differences: In densely populated areas like Metro Manila, higher monetary thresholds apply, and proceedings may be more formal.
Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: Temporary guidelines allowed virtual hearings, which may continue in some areas.
Statistical insights: According to DILG reports, a significant percentage of disputes (over 80% in some years) are settled at the barangay level, reducing court caseloads.

For complainants, documenting all steps is crucial to avoid dismissal in court. Respondents should participate in good faith to prevent adverse certifications.

Conclusion

The Katarungang Pambarangay embodies the Filipino value of bayanihan (community cooperation) in dispute resolution. While there is no prescribed number of hearings before issuing a CTFA—relying instead on time limits and good-faith efforts—the process ensures thorough attempts at settlement. Understanding this system empowers individuals to navigate local disputes effectively, promoting justice accessibility. For specific cases, consulting the local barangay or a legal professional is advisable to tailor the process to unique circumstances.