Alternative dispute resolution

Records show that more cases are filed at the first instance than the courts receiving them – the Municipal or Metropolitan Trial Courts and the Regional Trial Courts – can handle. Clogged dockets have been a chronic malaise besetting our judicial system simply because our courts cannot cope up with the number of cases pouring in almost daily. Even the Supreme Court, supposed to be the court of last resort, is not spared especially during this time when political candidates craving for media attention to improve their survey ratings go directly to it on any perceived violation of law. Appellate dockets are also clogged because losing litigants just cannot accept defeat or simply prolong the case for lack of any valid defense. And the problem is compounded by the fact that a large number of vacancies exists in the lower courts since very few competent and qualified lawyers are interested to join the judiciary owing to inadequate compensation.

According to our Rules of Court, only parties with sufficient cause or causes of action should seek redress before our courts of justice. A cause of action is defined as the act or omission by which a party violates a right of another. But whether a person violates the right of another can only be determined after the supposedly aggrieved person has filed the case in court and his action is duly docketed. So initially, the prospective complainant or his lawyer is the one who ascertains whether his right has been violated. More often than not, the passion of the moment dominates his decision in filing a suit. And lawyers, sad to admit, sometimes heightens this urge to "see you in court". Indeed, there is no sufficient deterrent to the filing of a baseless court suit. Exposure to liability for damages does not curb this propensity to file suits inasmuch as proof of malice is required before being held liable; and malice is so hard to prove.

Going to court is undoubtedly an expensive mode of settling legal disputes, financially, emotionally, physically and spiritually. Lawyers should point this out to their clients who ask them to file lawsuits. Oftentimes however, bitter feuds and recriminations are so strong as to overcome prudence and the spirit of reconciliation. A cursory examination of our court dockets shows a number of cases involving bitter feuds among members of rich families over enormous wealth. Those among them harboring deep-seated resentments are averse to any settlement so they pay their lawyers handsome fees to do their bidding in a fight to the finish. To them money is no problem. Furthermore, it seems that Filipinos are prone to litigations due to over zealousness in protecting their rights.

Unknown to many, however, a center has already been set up to bring court litigants together and talk things over in a sober, dispassionate, cool and civil manner. This is the Philippine Mediation Center located in the hall of justice of Makati City. I attended one such mediation, and I was impressed. The atmosphere really buoys up the hope of an amicable settlement. There are several cubicles where parties meet face to face before friendly and amiable mediators whose reconciliatory attitudes could touch the hardest of heart. I understand that so many cases all over the Philippines have already been settled by this center.

Another more important step towards unclogging court dockets is the enactment of RA 9285 recently signed into law by President GMA. The law institutionalizes an "inexpensive, swift and less adversarial system of resolving disputes other than through court litigation" This is the system of Alternative Dispute Resolution. With this law, the future looks bright for our judiciary in its seemingly incurable problem of clogged court dockets.

But over and above all, the best alternative in resolving disputes is living the message of the Holy Week by dying to our own selfishness and casting aside our selfish interests.

E-mail: jcson@info.com.ph