WHAT IS THE PROCEDURE IN THE KATARUNGAN PAMBARANGAY LAW? 1. While the dispute is under mediation conciliation or arbitration, the prescriptive. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT NO INDIVIDUAL CAN GO DIRECTLY TO COURT OR ANY GOVERNMENT OFFICE FOR ADJUDICATION OF HIS/HER . Pambarangay Law? As a general rule, all disputes may be the subject of barangay conciliation before the Katarungang Pambarangay, except for the following.

Author: Tygojinn Dibar
Country: French Guiana
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Environment
Published (Last): 10 December 2009
Pages: 230
PDF File Size: 10.5 Mb
ePub File Size: 3.28 Mb
ISBN: 897-8-89683-826-4
Downloads: 18916
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Doular

In fact, at least seven 7 of these documents were copies of her own submissions to the investigating prosecutor. Action on the petition. Guidelines on the Katarungang Pambarangay procedure”.

Apparently, the DOJ found probable cause only for slight oral defamation. Genabe, and report the action taken thereon within ten 10 days from receipt hereof. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved 13 December L, November 25,x x x held that although abusive remarks may ordinarily be considered as serious defamation, under the environmental circumstances of the case, there having been provocation on complainants part, and the utterances complained of having been made in the heat of unrestrained anger and obfuscationsuch utterances constitute only the crime of slight oral defamation.

Thus, technical rules of procedure like those under Sections 5 and 6 thereof should be interpreted in such a way to promote, not frustrate, justice. As we said in Santos v. Also, the petition was not accompanied with the required attachments, i. The Court further pambarangxy in Guy that when the DOJ Secretary took cognizance of the petitioner’s motion for reconsideration, he effectively excepted such motion from the katarungng of the aforequoted Section 13 of DOJ Circular No.

Petitioner Agbayani alleged that Undersecretary Pineda unfairly heeded only to the arguments interposed by respondent Genabe in her comment; and the CA, in turn, took his findings and reasoning as gospel truth.

We reiterate what we have stated i n Yao v. Moreover, a computer verification requested by the petitioner showed that the prosecutor assigned to the case had received a copy of the petitioners comment.


The system exists to help decongest the regular courts and works mostly as kafarungang, community-based mechanism for dispute resolution of conflicts,” [1] also described as a “compulsory mediation process at the village pambatangay. As alleged by the [petitioner] in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of her complaint-affidavit, respondent uttered the remarks subject matter of the instant case in the heat of anger. In particular, it is a rule that uttering defamatory words in the heat of anger, with some provocation on the part of the offended party constitutes only a light felony.


Section 5 of the NPS Rules on Appeal also provides that the petition for review must be accompanied by a legible duplicate original or certified katatungang copy of the resolution appealed from, together oaw legible true copies of the complaint, affidavits or sworn statements and other evidence submitted by the parties during the preliminary investigation or reinvestigation.

Agbayani asserted that these thirty-six 36 documents were surreptitiously and illegally attached to the records of the case, an act constituting extrinsic fraud and grave misconduct. While it may be presumed that the motion to defer arraignment accompanying the petition should also be filed within the appeal period, respondent Genabe can not actually be faulted if the resolution thereof was made after the lapse of the period to appeal. The petition is bereft of merit.

And since the crime committed by respondent Genabe consisted of her exact utterances, the DOJ erred in downgrading the same to slight oral defamation, completely disregarding the finding by katagungang Investigating Prosecutor of probable cause for the greater offense of grave oral defamation.

They do not constitute a court as they do not have judicial powers. The party taking the appeal shall be referred to in the petition as either “Complainant-Appellant” or “Respondent-Appellant. Retrieved 16 December In the interest of substantial justice, procedural rules of the most mandatory character in terms of compliance, may be relaxed.

This matter was readily kataeungang to the attention of Undersecretary Pineda by petitioner Agbayani in her motion for reconsideration, who however must surely have found such contention without merit, and thus denied the motion.

That there is no showing of any reversible error. Oral defamation under Article of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, is penalized as follows: Surely, this power of the Secretary of Justice to review includes the discretion to accept additional evidence from the investigating prosecutor or from herein respondent Genabe, evidence which nonetheless appears to kataarungang already been submitted to the investigating prosecutor but inadvertently omitted by her when she filed her petition.

Katarungang Pambarangay – Wikipedia

But while prosecutors are given sufficient latitude of discretion in the determination of probable cause, their findings are still subject to review by the Secretary of Justice. She denied that she gave provocation to respondent Genabe, pambarwngay that the latter committed the offense with malice aforethought and not in the heat of anger.


People[28] oral defamation or slander is the speaking of base and defamatory words which tend to prejudice another in his reputation, office, trade, business or means of livelihood.

The decision whether to dismiss a complaint or not, is dependent upon the sound discretion of the prosecuting fiscal and, ultimately, that of the Secretary of Justice. Effect of failure to comply with the requirements. The lupon of each barangay shall have authority to bring together the parties actually residing in the same city or municipality for amicable settlement of all disputes except: Throughout the Oatarungang the Barangay Justice Systems handles thousands of cases a pambarxngay.

The Supreme Court held that the authority of the Secretary of Justice to review and order the withdrawal of an Information in instances where he finds the absence of a prima facie case is not time-barred, albeit subject to the approval of the court, if its kataruhgang over the accused has meanwhile attached. Presidential Decree talks an unofficial “time-honored tradition of amicably settling disputes among family and barangay members at the barangay level without judicial resources”.

I certify that the conclusions in the above Decision had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the pambarngay of the Courts Division.

According to Undersecretary Pineda, the confluence of these circumstances was the immediate cause of respondent Genabe’s emotional and psychological distress.

Undeniably, both petitioner Agbayani and respondent Genabe are residents of Las Pi as City and both work at the RTC, and the incident which is the subject matter of the case happened in their workplace. This page was last edited on 7 Decemberat Per Section 12, R.

We shall first tackle Agbayani’s arguments on the first two issues raised in the instant petition.

Or, he may proceed with the investigation if the complaint in his view is sufficient and in proper form.