REACTION PAPER

On Alternative Dispute Resolution Proceedings

On December 11, 2013, 2:30 P.M.

Melanie R. Boiser
LLB-1
Alternative Dispute Resolution (LLB 216)

It was a court-annexed mediation. The defendant was taken into the court escorted by the police officer
and followed suit are the plaintiff, the clerk of court and the mediator. Quietness and stillness was in the
courtroom prior to the mediators initial introduction of the parties to the mediation conference. Unlike
the courtroom drama, the scene during the initial conference was homey save for the defendant who
was handcuffed. There was no witness to testify against the defendant, evidences were not presented
and presence of the parties counsel was also not evident. And the mediator himself did not disclose the
merits of the case. Conclusion was drawn only that it was a criminal offense because the defendant was
handcuffed. Precluded to discuss in the conference are the merits of the case and the evaluation
whether the defendant was guilty of the offense or not.
Elements of the proceedings of the mediation were present during the conference. The mediator
respectfully asked the willingness of both parties to be bound by the mediation proceedings prior to his
initial concurrence of award to be rendered. The mediator did not disclose the merits of the case. Both
parties submit themselves for an alternative dispute resolution. Although presence of the counsel from
both parties is not prohibited, their absence somehow helped the efficient flow of the resolution of the
case. It was a simple inquiry from the mediator what are the things or damages the defendant has to
award to be able to forgive his wrongdoings with the plaintiff. And the plaintiff gladly accounted in
monetary value the damages done to his property physically without much equation of the emotional
trauma that transpired during the incident that lead to the defendants imprisonment. It was a minimal
amount, but the defendant due to his lack of financial resources to pay the damages right away, he
pleaded for an extension of period. The smooth handling of the mediator during the conference, not to

mention the intimidation felt maybe by both parties because of our presence, the plaintiff gave in to the
extension of time. It was put on record. The defendant is set to be free under the condition that he
meets the condition on their binding agreement that was put on record in the mediation conference.
Enforcement of the mediated settlement agreement as per the provisions of the Alternative Dispute
Resolution Act of 2004 was provided during the mediation proceedings. In the absence of their counsel,
it was the mediator who prepared the settlement agreement, typewritten by the clerk of court. The
parties then signed the settlement agreement and the mediator explained the contents of the
settlement agreement in a language known to the parties which is bisaya. The mediator also explained
to both parties that their agreement is binding and shall be submitted to the court where their case is
being tried, so that the defendant will be properly endorsed for released.
The defendant and plaintiff shook hands after the proceedings to literally show their settlement
agreement. It was a good ending for their mishap. The mediator candidly shows to both parties his
intent to resolve the dispute without overtly showing his prowess in laws. There was no showing of his
expertise in laws, but his sincere effort to resolve the case. The reason of which is also the nondisclosure of the merits of the case to save the defendant and the plaintiff of their other options to
instigate the case through court trial.
The fee per successful mediation is minimal, but to able to resolve a number of cases in one day is a lot
for a part time mediator. Yet the real essence of the alternative dispute resolution is not to corrupt the
minds of the mediator to resolve the case right away to collect their fees, but to sincerely extend a help
to parties in resolving their case in an efficient and speedy means. If the fee for mediation was
excessive, in my opinion, the corruption takes place. But to resolve the case sincerely in an efficient
manner, in accordance with the provisions of law, the monetary value would follow. This is the reason I
believe that most lawyers are not into mediation role. Albeit there are lawyers in their own office
resolve cases without resorting to trial also.
All in all, the mediation conference being witnessed last December 11, 2013 in the regional trial court in
Davao del Norte was a learning and exploratory experience for a law student. To be able to witness
mediation conference is an opportunity to widen the perspective of law students after successful bar
exam. It helps lessen the court dockets, it helps resolve dispute in an efficient and speedy means and an
alternative en route for aspiring lawyers.