Procedures for Unserved Summons from the Lupong Tagapamayapa

Procedures for Unserved Summons from the Lupong Tagapamayapa
Philippine Legal Context

I. Introduction to the Lupong Tagapamayapa and the Katarungang Pambarangay

The Lupong Tagapamayapa operates under the Katarungang Pambarangay (Barangay Justice System), which is established by the Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act No. 7160). The Lupon is composed of the Punong Barangay (Barangay Chairperson) and selected community members tasked with mediating or arbitrating disputes at the barangay level. The purpose of the Katarungang Pambarangay is to:

  1. Encourage the amicable settlement of disputes without need for lengthy court proceedings.
  2. Decongest the dockets of higher courts by resolving minor disputes at the community level.
  3. Promote harmony among neighbors by settling matters quickly and informally.

When a dispute is brought to the Lupon, the typical process involves:

  1. Filing of the complaint by the aggrieved party.
  2. Issuance and service of summons or notices to the respondent(s).
  3. Mediation or conciliation proceedings—either at the initial level of the Barangay Chairperson or at the level of the Pangkat ng Tagapagsundo (Conciliation Panel).
  4. Amicable settlement or issuance of a Certificate to File Action if no settlement is reached, or if the respondent fails to appear despite due notice.

The summons is crucial because it compels the respondent to attend the conciliation proceedings. However, circumstances occasionally arise where summons cannot be served or remain unserved. This article focuses on the implications and procedures surrounding unserved summons within the Katarungang Pambarangay system.

II. Legal Basis for Summons in Barangay Conciliation

  1. Local Government Code (LGC), RA 7160

    • Sections 399-422 govern the Katarungang Pambarangay system. While these sections provide the general framework (including the requirement that the parties be notified and summoned), they do not describe every minute detail of service of summons.

  2. Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of the LGC

    • These regulations and related guidelines from the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) often outline practical details on how the Lupon or the Barangay Secretary carries out service of summons, as well as next steps if service is unsuccessful.

  3. Jurisdictional Considerations

    • Katarungang Pambarangay typically has jurisdiction over disputes where both parties reside in the same city or municipality and are not otherwise subject to exceptions under the law (e.g., offenses punishable by more than one year of imprisonment, certain civil status cases, etc.).

III. How Summons Are Normally Served

Under normal circumstances, summons or notices in a barangay conciliation proceeding are served in the following manner:

  1. Personal Service

    • The Punong Barangay, the Barangay Secretary, or a designated Lupon member personally hands over the summons to the respondent at his or her residence, place of work, or wherever the respondent may be found.

  2. Through Authorized Agents

    • Sometimes, a barangay official (e.g., barangay tanod or other authorized personnel) may deliver the summons if personal service by the Lupon Secretary is not feasible.

  3. Details of the Summons

    • The summons must include the date, time, and place of the conciliation meeting.
    • It must clearly indicate the need for the respondent’s presence and any legal consequences for failure to appear.

IV. Reasons Why Summons May Remain Unserved

Despite the straightforward procedure, there are instances where summons cannot be effectively served:

  1. Respondent Has Moved or Cannot Be Located

    • The respondent may have changed address without proper notice, making personal service impossible.

  2. Respondent’s Intentional Avoidance

    • The respondent may be deliberately eluding service to avoid participation in the proceedings.

  3. Inaccurate or Insufficient Information

    • The complaint may contain incorrect details (e.g., wrong address, misspelled name), hindering successful delivery.

  4. Residence Outside Territorial Jurisdiction

    • If the respondent lives outside the municipality or city, the Lupon might not have jurisdiction to require personal conciliation.
    • In such cases, the Lupon must determine whether it can still hear the matter or whether the dispute is an exception to the mandatory barangay conciliation requirement.

V. Procedures When Summons Remains Unserved

When summons is returned unserved, the Lupon (usually through the Barangay Secretary or other authorized official) must undertake reasonable diligence to serve it. Below are the procedural steps typically followed:

  1. Verification of Respondent’s Address

    • The Lupon Secretary may verify the accuracy of the respondent’s address. Sometimes, the complainant is asked to provide additional contact details.
    • If there is a new or alternative address, the Lupon Secretary will attempt to re-issue the summons and effect personal service at the updated location.

  2. Attempt at Substituted Service (If Allowed Locally)

    • While the Local Government Code itself does not comprehensively spell out substituted service (unlike court procedures under the Rules of Court), some barangays adopt practical methods akin to leaving summons with a relative or a household member of suitable age and discretion, if the respondent is consistently absent.
    • This step depends on local ordinances or guidelines and the discretion of the Lupon Chairperson. Substituted service at the barangay level is less formal but can be resorted to if personal service is not possible.

  3. Repeated Attempts

    • If the respondent’s location is truly unknown, the Lupon may make multiple attempts to serve. Proper documentation of every attempt is kept (i.e., date, time, manner of attempt, and person who attempted service).

  4. Failure of Service

    • If, after repeated tries, the summons remains unserved because the respondent cannot be found or is deliberately evading service, the Lupon Secretary or Punong Barangay will note this fact in the records.

  5. Report to the Punong Barangay and the Pangkat

    • Once the Lupon Secretary exhausts efforts to serve the summons, a report is made to the Punong Barangay and/or the Pangkat ng Tagapagsundo, detailing the reasons for failure of service.

VI. Consequences of Unserved Summons

  1. Possible Issuance of Certificate to File Action

    • If the Lupon is unable to bring the respondent into conciliation proceedings (through no fault of the complainant), the barangay may issue a Certificate to File Action based on the fact that conciliation could not proceed because the respondent was unreachable or refused to participate.
    • This certificate allows the complainant to elevate the dispute to court or other appropriate forum, as the mandatory barangay conciliation requirement is deemed satisfied or exhausted.

  2. Dismissal or Closure at Barangay Level

    • If the Lupong Tagapamayapa determines that the respondent’s absence or the failure to serve summons means the dispute is effectively not resolvable at the barangay level (e.g., the respondent lives in a different municipality or the matter is outside territorial jurisdiction), the Lupon may close the case or dismiss it for lack of jurisdiction, issuing a certificate or a statement to that effect.

  3. Restarting the Conciliation Process

    • If at any point the respondent later appears or is found, the Lupon may attempt to restart the conciliation process, subject to time limits under the law (generally 15 days from the first meeting, extendable once for another 15 days).

  4. Documentation for Higher Courts

    • The failure of service and attempts made are often crucial evidence if the matter goes to court. Courts generally require a showing that all barangay-level remedies have been exhausted or that the respondent was unreachable.

VII. Timeframes and Extensions

  1. Mandatory Period to Settle

    • Once the parties (or at least the complainant) appear, the barangay conciliation proceedings are normally concluded within 15 days from the date of the first meeting. The period is extendable for another 15 days if a settlement appears likely.
    • However, if the summons is not even served, the countdown does not strictly commence until the respondent has been notified or an attempt at notifying them has been made.

  2. Issuance of Certificate to File Action

    • If within the allowable conciliation period, the Lupon cannot proceed due to unserved summons, the Lupon often issues the certificate indicating that no settlement was reached because the respondent could not be notified or failed to appear despite repeated attempts.

VIII. Tips and Best Practices

  1. Ensure Accurate Information

    • Complainants should provide complete and correct addresses and any relevant details (e.g., phone numbers, workplace) for the respondent.

  2. Document Everything

    • The Lupon Secretary should carefully record each effort to serve the summons: the date and time of attempted service, who attempted it, the outcome, and any statements from neighbors or relatives.

  3. Coordinate with Barangay Tanods / Local Residents

    • Barangay officials can coordinate with tanods or neighbors to inquire about the respondent’s actual residence or whereabouts. This helps confirm if the respondent is truly out of reach or simply avoiding the process.

  4. Observe Local Ordinances or DILG Guidelines

    • Some localities have more detailed instructions on how to conduct service if the respondent is absent. Familiarity with these can expedite or clarify the process.

  5. Assess Jurisdiction Early

    • If it becomes clear that the respondent has moved outside the city or municipality, the Lupon should determine if the dispute is still under its mandatory conciliation coverage or if the matter should be certified directly for filing in court.

IX. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

  1. What if the respondent refuses to receive the summons in person?

    • If the respondent physically refuses, that fact should be documented. The Lupon will typically deem the respondent “served” and, if the respondent continues to evade or fails to appear, a Certificate to File Action may be issued.

  2. Can the Punong Barangay order the police to locate the respondent?

    • The Katarungang Pambarangay process is generally non-coercive. There is no direct authority akin to a court subpoena or warrant. The Punong Barangay may request assistance from local authorities, but the power to compel presence is limited compared to that of the judiciary.

  3. Is publication of summons allowed at the barangay level (like in court proceedings)?

    • The Local Government Code does not explicitly provide for publication of summons at the barangay level. Publication is typically a method available to regular courts under the Rules of Court, not for Lupon proceedings.

  4. What if the address is incorrect due to the complainant’s mistake?

    • The complainant must rectify the address and cooperate with the Lupon in a timely manner. Delays in providing correct information can prolong or terminate the barangay-level process without a settlement.

  5. Does unserved summons invalidate the entire barangay proceeding?

    • In principle, the proceeding cannot truly commence without informing the respondent. Hence, if summons is completely unserved, no genuine conciliation occurs. The usual outcome is the issuance of a Certificate to File Action indicating the respondent was unreachable or failed to appear.

X. Conclusion

In the Philippine barangay justice system, service of summons is the lynchpin of bringing the parties together for amicable settlement. When summons remain unserved, the Lupong Tagapamayapa must:

  1. Exhaust all reasonable efforts (re-serving, verifying addresses, coordinating with tanods or neighbors).
  2. Document each attempt and the reasons for failure.
  3. Issue the appropriate certification—most often a Certificate to File Action—if the respondent remains beyond reach or refuses to appear.

This procedure ensures that access to justice is maintained despite the respondent’s absence or unavailability. Once the barangay’s efforts are deemed sufficient and the respondent still fails to participate, the dispute may be escalated to the courts or other relevant agencies as needed. In this way, unserved summons, while disruptive to the Barangay Justice System’s goal of speedy resolution, do not prevent the complainant from ultimately seeking redress before higher tribunals.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login