INTRODUCTION

This chapter discusses the background of the study, conceptual

framework and the statement of the problem. It comprises the main focus

of the research described in. Existing studies and theories were also

presented to show the relationships among the topics. Moreover, this

portion highlights the rationale as to why this study will be conducted.

Background of the Study

Conflict is not a new phenomenon in the history of human beings. It

always exists as long as human beings live together and it is an

inescapable human experience. Conflict can be understood as

engagement in a fight or possible confrontation between two or more

parties as aspiring towards incompatible or competitive means or ends. It

is a natural and unavoidable part of human existence, for example, a

nature disagreement resulting from individual or groups that differ in

attitude, beliefs, values or needs. On the other hand, Conflict Resolution

theorists argue that it is possible to transcend conflict if the parties can

help to explore, analyze, question and reframe their position and interest

(Berhe, 2012).

In Africa, they have their own philosophy of life. They have a

distinct culture by which they see and interact themselves. For instance,

individualism is a philosophy of life in the West as communality is in Africa.

Collective mode of living is a peculiar identification of Africans in general.

In fact, this mode of living is a different version of life rather than connoting

backwardness and/or primitiveness which might be wrongly perceived by

some westerners. The communal life in Africa, on the other hand, has an

implication in conflict and its resolution. The issues of security, peace and

conversely conflict are communal matters in Africa, unlike in the West.

Thus the priority of African traditional conflict resolution mechanisms is to

bring about collective social stability and harmony. They do not simply

focus on the punitive measure nor do they merely settle the conflict. They

rather strive to bring about sustaining peace among the disputants thereby

the prevalence of enmity and hatred within as well as cross communities

would permanently be vanished (Tsega, 2012).

In the case of Botswana, the focus is on the Tswana speaking

ethnic groups as they share many commonalities including language,

customs and traditional religions. Together, they are the dominant ethnic

groups which were recognized by the colonial government and endorsed

by the national government at independence. To a large extent, the

country’s local government districts were based on the boundaries of

these groups (Vaughan, 2003).

In the Philippines, during the Spanish and American regime,

dispute resolution mechanisms were made more rational through the

inclusion of the said function in the local governmental systems.

Gradually, the originally conversational mode of resolving disputes

became more and more adversarial as the western-style judicial system

took over their functions. Disputes in the Philippines evolved from both

indigenous traditions and legal systems adopted from western models.

Dispute resolution is one of the functions of a sound political systems.

Dispute resolution machinery already existed in the Philippines even

before the advent of the Spanish and American colonization. Disputes

arising from the daily affairs of the communities were brought before the

elders of such communities on a conversational fashion for the purpose of

threshing out the issues and resolving them along the principles of justice

and fairness. Outside of this forum, no other dispute –resolving forum

existed (Morales, 2002).

Philippines came up with Alternative Dispute Resolution or ADR

which refers to several formal or informal processes for settlement of

conflicts, outside of or in the periphery of institutional judicial process. It is

another option to the structured adversarial approach adopted in court

litigation. While ADR may be viewed as an intervention to the court’s

burdened dockets, it must be considered on its own merits as an effective

system on resolving disputes. In 1978, Presidential decree 1508 of the

erstwhile President Ferdinand E. Marcos decreed the formation of

Katarungang Pambarangay o Lupong Tagapamayapa (community-based

justice system, or Barangay Justice System). The principal Author of the

Katarungang Pambarangay Law was the late Alfredo F. Tadiar, best

known as the “The Father of Alternative Dispute Resolution” in the

Philippines. His serious commitment to delivery of social justice through

creative dispute settlement rewarded him the distinct honor and privilege

of serving as chair of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Department of the Supreme Court Philippine Judicial Academy from 2004-

2005. Aside from settling minor issues among barangay residents, ADR is

applied to reaching amicable settlement of disputes among higher level

parties such as multinational corporations and employer-employee

relations (Torrevillas, 2017).

In certain types of disputes, this law was provided for the

compulsory use in the barangay, the smallest unit of Local Government, of

mediation, conciliation and arbitration. Since its discretion and supervision

were entrusted to the Department of Interior and Local Government, the

system was later integrated into local Government Code. It is less

expensive, swifter and efficient, less or non-adversarial, thus generating

results that can be more satisfying and enduring (Morales, 2002).

In Mindanao, Southern Philippines, a study conducted by the Pailig

Development Foundation, Inc. (2007) on rido in Mindanao revealed that to

end that rido is initiated or forced wedding in order to ensure long lasting

relationship between the two rivaling families. The Sultan, Datu, or Council

would be responsible in settling disputes in their area of jurisdiction. But if

rido can’t be settled in early intervention, the leaders in the area should do

the traditional procedure of conflict resolution. Rido or conflict arising

betwee Maranaos who belong to one and the kinship group.

According to Sumaguina (2000, there are two kinds of Maranao

conflicts which are easier for the Maranaos to resolve by peaceful means.

The firs kind is called rido-o-totonganaya or conflict arising between

Maranaos who belong to one and the same kinship group. In this kind of

conflict, the Maranaos just resolve it through the system of kokoman-a-

kambetabata’a. This system has an advantages over the due process of

law or any other Maranao indigenous methods of dispute settlement. The

second kind of Marano conflict of lesser gravity and intensity is the rido-o-

sesalakawa-a-tao- a damakamaolika. In this kind, an informally organized

traditional court or committee in the community where the conflict arose

may intervene to put the dispute under control for the sake of peace in the

community. Furthermore, Sumaguina found out that when a conflict

occurs in the community, the relatives of the disputants would close ranks

to provide some moral, financial, physical, or human support to their

relatives who are involved in the conflict or dispute. The Presidential

Commission for the Rehabilitation and Development of Southern

Philippines or PCRDSP (1980) revealed that in the act of maintaining

peace and order in the community, pangalawat is practiced among the

Bukidnons and Manobos.

The resolution of conflicts, Sumaguina continues, is not easy, its

merely ritualistic; and the process is very dynamic and difficult. Its

dynamism lies in Maranao system of Mediation. For Maranaos, mediation

is very crucial; it’s likely to determine the success or failure of the

Maranao’s conflicts.

A similar study conducted by Humpa (2002) on the system of

conflict resolution of the Thimuays in the three barangays of Lapuyan,

Zamboanga del sur,”. The researcher found out that no common steps are

followed by the Thimuays or heads also known as Baluga in resolving

conflicts. By calling the parties, the Thimuays assume jurisdiction in the

resolution of complaints. Yet, there are no formalities required in filling the

complaint. However, it was found also that the decisions of the Thimuays

about those conflicts were final.

In Visayas, Central Philippines, Rio (2016) in his study on the

indigenous dispute settlement discovered that vengeance is underlying

principle of the justice system of the Panay-Bukidnon culture in the

Visayan region. For most members of the tribe, the penalty of

incarceration cannot compensate for the loss of a family member. Rather

than a personal pursuit, the bereaved family considers vengeance as a

shared community obligation. Failure to avenge can create an impression

of the crime committed as just and predisposes a family to abuse by other

members of the community. “Kantang” is the practice in Visayas wherein

leaving the dead unburied and placing it outside the aggrieved family’s

house on a bamboo bed without coffin. The decomposing body is left open

until there is Durog or partner dead body from the assailant’s family. As

such, kantang aims to dramatize the extent of grief that family has.

In Luzon, particularly in Cordillera Administrative Region (CAR),

they have their own alternatives in resolving disputes. In Abra, Itneg is an

alternate name of Tinguian. Tinguian means the people of the mountains.

It was originally used to refer to all mountain dwelling people. These days,

it is particularly used to refer to a cultural minority group occupying the

mountains of Abra. The Tinguian are listed as one of the Cordilleran

people called "Igorots". Some feature of the culture, customs, traditions,

rituals, beliefs and ethnic values are the same with the Igorots. A Tinguian

village is usually headed by one of the old men or "lakay" chosen by a

council of elder members of the village. A "lakay" is chosen based on his

courage, health, wisdom and character. His role is to settle disputes in

accordance with the customs and traditions. If a dispute is serious or the

problem is new, he calls the council of elders or heads of influential

families to discuss and decide with him (Joshua Project, 2019).

In Benguet, even before the incorporation of lupons into the

country’s system of governance, the indigenous peoples in the Cordillera

have long established a method of resolving disagreements outside the

halls of the courts. These methods are in fact the basis of what we regard

today as the alternative method of dispute resolution (Cadalig, 2019).

In Ifugao, conflicts and disputes of self-interest may challenge their

linkage to one another; still, harmonious relationships served all the

hospitable Ifugao people to live in oneness and peace. Social standings

may be acknowledged during the olden times; however, everybody still

submits to the community’s council no matter what his standing is. To

maintain fairness, the society’s customary laws are exercised by the

community’s council which is primarily composed of trusted mediators

called “Monkalun.” The group is generally comprised of elders who come

from any class. However, usually, members of the group come from the

kadangyan class because of their indisputable reputation and respect from

the people (Butic, 2015).

In Northern Luzon, in the beautiful province of Kalinga, made of

mountains and waterfalls, lives a tribe of the same name. The Indigenous

People of Kalinga have found balance between progress and tradition,

and live a semi-urban lifestyle while respecting the tribal law.

The pochon means “peace pact agreement” between two subtribes of

Kalinga. Included in the pochon is the indigenous way of settling a dispute:

when a conflict arises between two subtribes, members from both

subtribes meet to try and find a solution that will suit both parties, even if it

takes days of discussion. The Kalingas only use the Philippines’ justice

system as a very last resort. Today, the pochon is called to solve what

would be a very private conflict in the western world (Haldemann, 2014).

This study is being undertaken with a view of developing alternative

dispute resolution mechanisms in order to make justice more accessible to

the people and to unclog the dockets of the courts. This study is important

of a certain community in settling a particular issue that were arising so we

come up to know some of the alternatives and its processes of every tribe

in resolving disputes. In doing so, we are to help the Local Government

Unit by sharing some mode of alternatives which have been underutilized

for so long that they may adopt.

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

1. What are the common forms of conflicts resolved?

2. What are the indigenous conflict resolution mechanism utilized

in Pasil, Kalinga?
3. What are the processes involved for each indigenous practice of

settling disputes?
 Traditional Conflict Resolution Mechanism Among Indigenous
Cultural Communities of Pasil, Kalinga

Conceptual Framework

The study focused on the traditional conflict resolution mechanism

of indigenous communities of Pasil, Kalinga. Tribal practice of Pasil in

relation to traditional conflict resolution mechanism remains one of the

important remnants of the elders’ role in keeping justice in the community.

The objectives of the theories are to further explain the societal situation

as to why conflict still exist; Acquire specific critical knowledge and

produced a conceptualized direction of change. First theory is conflict

resolution theory, followed by .

Conflict Theory

Conflict theory has been used to explain a wide range of social

phenomena, including wars and revolutions, wealth and poverty,

discrimination and domestic violence. Marx’s conflict theory focused on

the conflict between two primary classes. Each class consists of a group

of people bound by mutual interests and a degree of property ownership,

often supported by the state. The bourgeoisie represents the members of

society who hold the majority of the wealth and means. The proletariat

includes those considered working class or poor. With the rise of

capitalism, Marx theorized that the bourgeoisie, a minority within the

population, would use their influence to oppress the proletariat, the

majority class. One conflict theory assumptions is war, wherein it tends to

see war as either a unified or as a cleanser of societies. In conflict theory,

war is the result of a cumulative and growing conflict between individuals

and groups and between whole societies. In the context of war, society

may become unified in some ways, but conflicts still remains between

multiple societies. On the other hand, war may also result in the wholesale

end of society (Chappelow, 2019).

The theory relates much to the study on tribal settling disputes thus,

conflict resolution refers to strategies of disposing off or settling disputes

which may otherwise lead to violence or damage the relationship between

various people, so it is always better to diffuse and resolve conflict before

it damages the relations. Maybe in groups or individual of people who are

in competition for the same resources. On the study we are able to

pinpoint the different types of conflicts being occurred and the appropriate

mechanism to be use.

A Canonical Theory of Dynamic Decision –making

The theory presents that decision-making is articulated as a set of

canonical functions that are sufficiently general to accommodate diverse

viewpoints, yet sufficiently precise that they can be instantiated in different

ways for specific theoretical or practical purposes. The canons cover the
whole decision based on the goals, beliefs, and background knowledge of

the decision-maker to the formulation of decision options, establishing

preference over them, and making commitments. Commitments can lead

to the initiation of new decisions and any step in the cycle can incorporate

reasoning about previous decisions and the rationales for them, and lead

to revising or abandoning existing commitments. The theory situates

decision-making with respect to other –high level cognitive likes problem

solving, planning, and collaborative decision-making. The canonical

approach is assed in three domains; cognitive and neuropsychology, and

decision engineering. But we take the cognition and neuropsychology

wherein it explains human behavior and predict performance, irrespective

of how performance compares with rational norms.

Naturalistic Decision Models

A practitioner Drummond (1991) “synoptic model” of a full decision

cycle

1. Identify problem

2. Clarify and prioritize goals

3. Generate options

4. Evaluate options

5. Compare predicted consequences of each option with goals

 6. Choose option with consequences most closely matching

goals (COOPER, et. al., 2013).

In this study we have considered the whole cycle of DDM:

recognizing and framing a problem in light of current beliefs; clarifying and

prioritizing goals; generating options that would achieve current goals;

evaluating preferences over the options; and aggravating preferences to

select the best.

Heuristics: the psychology of mental shortcuts

Gestalt psychologist postulated that humans solve problems and

perceive objects based on heuristics. In the early 201th century, the

psychologist Maz Weitheirmer identified laws by which humans group

objects together into patterns. Heuristics “mental shortcuts” are efficient

mental processes that help humans solve problems and learn new

concepts. These processes make problems less complex by ignoring

some of the information that’s coming into brain, either consciously or

unconsciously. Today, heuristics have become an influential concept in

the decision-making. Human rely on a limited set of heuristics when

making decisions with information about which they are uncertain. Some

suggest that thus theory works because not every decision is worth

spending the time necessary to reach the best possible conclusion, and

thus people use mental shortcuts to save time and energy. Another
interpretation is that brain simply does not have the capacity to process

everything, and so we use mental shortcuts (Lim, 2018).

Aside from the theories stated, the study is also added to the

following concepts which shows some similarities with the Pasil customary

settlement of disputes. Foremost of these similarities is the imposition of

an impartial third party which was created to settle directly or helps for the

settlement of disputes among the conflicting parties.

Mediation

According to the study of Sabang (2017) mediation is a process,

non-judicial conflict settlement involving assistance by third parties who

either act as a bridge between parties who do not meet, or who may sit

with the disputants to chair meetings. The mediator usually offers

concentrate proposals as a resolution but such is no more than an advice

and under no condition shall be considered binding to parties.

Arbitration

According to Murray (2019) states that arbitration is the solution

of a dispute by an impartial third party, usually a tribunal created by the

parties themselves under a charter known as the composition of the body

and the manner of selection of its members, its rules of proceeding and

sometimes even the law to be applied by it, and the issues of fact or law to

be resolved.
Conciliation

Conciliation is an informal, quick, and cost effective way to

resolve a complaint. It allows the complaint and the respondent an

opportunity to talk about the issues and resolve the matter themselves.

The process is like a court hearing. It is not a forum for cross examination

or to determine whether a breach of the law has occurred (Snyman,

2017).

Some of the social practices of the ancient Ifugaos when settling conflicts

and disagreements of interests are as follows:

Uggub: The ‘Shooting’

Literally, uggub means runo or talahib shoot where the contestants

use the talahib shoot to determine the winner of the case. This is resorted

in theft cases when the suspect pledges innocence, and if the complainant

and the suspect agree to use this method, they automatically abide to

whatever is the outcome- if the defendant loses, he returns the stolen

thing, or, pays it back; if he wins, he can claim from his accuser some sort

of indemnity for false accusation.

A-agba: The “Balancing”

In this method, the victim of a theft or burglary rounds up all the

suspects and leads them to his house while he invites a native priest to

act as judge. The things necessary in the a-agba divination ritual are
either a pair of eggs, or a bolo and an egg. The eggs are simply placed on

a table or on the floor while the priest chants his prayers to the gods

before performing the a-agba ritual on all the suspects. In the two-egg

method, the priest attempts to balance one egg atop the other egg and

while doing so, he mentions aloud the name of one of the suspects,

asking the gods whether the suspect is the guilty party. If the egg stands

balanced no matter how much tapping is done on the table, the suspect is

pointed to as the culprit.

Bultong: The “Wrestling”

The bultong is a unique kind of wrestling among the Ifugaos and

which is also used in settling disputes pertaining to land rights. In this, the

protagonists or their representative’s hold firmly to each other’s body and

at a given signal, try to pin down their opponent to the ground. When two

Ifugaos dispute a parcel of land or disagree of certain rice field

boundaries, they may agree to settle their dispute though bultong. There

are two types of bultong decisions – the first decides the location of the

boundary line where it gives the winner the right to draw the line, and the

second involves an agreement whereby the exact point where the winner

pins down his opponent will be the new location of the boundary line.

Trial-by-ordeal: The “Boiling”

 Back during the olden times, the ordeal method was a common

process of litigation among ethnic groups in the country, and among the

ancient Ifugaos, this was also practiced. The disputing parties or their

representatives or a suspect who wishes to clear his name made to

undergo an ordeal such as dipping the hands into a pot of boiling water.

The protagonists or their representatives dip their hands in a pot of boiling

water at the same time. The first one to remove his hand from the

cauldron is the loser. If both of them take off their hands at exactly the

same time, their hands are scrutinized for possible burns. The one found

to have suffered more is adjudged the loser. Today, this practice has been

abandoned.

Haliw: The “Payment”

According to Ifugao Law, the aggrieved part – the one falsely

accused or proven “innocent” after the trial – can claim reasonable

indemnity from his accusers. This indemnity is called the haliw. The

accuser is morally obliged to indemnify the defendant, that is, if the

defendant claims it; however, if not, the accuser is not bound to give him

anything. The indemnity may be in the form of chickens, pigs, valuables or

money depending on the extent of the moral damage. In the case of the

rich man versus the poor man, the latter may claim the haliw. Though

these may seem impractical in the modern era, the Ifugaos do yet believe
in the intervention of their gods and spirits who look into the process to

ensure that justice is served. Such is a beautiful justice influenced by no

external forces, but by the will of traditions and practices shaped through

beliefs of people on the powers and supremacy of the heaven (Butic,

2015).

This diagram presents the explanation of conflicts, indigenous

mechanism in settling disputes, process and conflict resolution.

Indigenous
mechanisms in
settling disputes

Conflict
Conflict
resolution

Process

Figure 1: Schematic diagram

REFERENCE CITED

ANON, 2019. Philippine Dispute Resolution Center INC. All rights

reserved.
BARNES, B.E and F.V. MAGDALENA. 2016. Traditional
peacemaking processes among indigenous populations in
the northern and southern philippines. In H. Tuso, and M.
Flasherby (Eds), Creating the third force: Indigenous
processes of peacemaking (pp. 209-223). Washington D.C:
Lexington Books.
BERHE, Y. 2012. An Assessment of Indigenous Conflict Resolution
Mechanism of Mezard in Rural Alamata Woreda, Tigray
National State, Ethiopa.
BUTIC, D. P. 205. Ifugao settlements of disputes: A rule of culture.
Acessed on August 22, 2019.
CADALIG, J. 209. Tongtong: The basis of alternative dispute
resolution. Acessed on August 2, 209.
CHAPPELOW, J. 2019. Behavioral economics: Conflict theory.
Accessed on August 31, 2019.
CLEMENTE, R.C., R.T. Vecaldo and A. Y. Tamangen. 2015.

Effectiveness of Bodong as an alternative dispute resolution:

A glimpse of Kalinga’s’ peace framework. Accessed on

August 20,209.

COLLINS, R. 1974. Conflict sociology. New York: Academic Press,

pp.56-6. Accessed on August 31, 2019.

COOPER, R.P., D. W. GLASSPOOL, and J. FOX. (2013). A

canonical theory of dynamic-decision making. ACESSED

ON September 5, 2019.
DEE, A. and R. SONGCO. 2019. Philippines: Litigation & dispute
resolution 2019. Accessed on august 22, 2019 at 10:30 pm.
HALDEMANN, S. A process of conflict resolution in Kalinga.
Accessed on August 22, 209.
Accessed September 2, 2019
HUMPA, L. S. 2002. The system of conflict resolution of the
Thimuays in the three barangays of Lapuyan, Zamboanga
del sur. Undergraduate Thesis in Political Science, College
of Arts and Social Sciences, MSU- Iligan Institute of
Technology, Iligan City. Accessed on August 24, 2019.at
11:23pm.
JOCANO, F.L.1968. Sulod society: A study in the kinship system
and social organization of a mountain people in Central
Panay. Quezon City: University of Philippine Press.
JOSHUA, .20l0

LIM, A. 2018. Heuristics: The psychology of mental shortcuts.

Accessed on September 5, 2019.

MORALES, R.D. 2002. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR): How

out-of-court systems are used as dispute resolution
mechanism. Accessed on August 20, 2019 at 9:35 pm.
MURRAY, J. 20l9. Learn how the arbitration process works.
Accessed on August l, 20l9.

PAILIG DEVELOPMENT FOUNDATION, INC. 2007. Rido: a

traditional conflict in modern times. Iligan City: PDFAccessed
on August l, 2019.

PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION FOR THE REHABILITATION AND

DEVELOPMENT OF SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES (1980).
Bagani: Man of dignity. Metro Manila: PCRDSP Press.
Accessed on august 24 at 10:55pm.
RIO, I.D. 2016. Indigenous dispute settlement: Learning from the
Panay Bukidnon tribe. International Journal of Humanities
and Social Science, 6(11), 73-80.

TORREVILLAS, D. M. 2017. Settling disputes thru creative

solutions (Philippine Star) 4:00 pm. accessed on august 22,
2019 at 10:56 pm.
TUBADEZA, G. C A. 208. Tingguian summit binds Abra IPMRs for
development. Accessed on August 22, 209.
SNYMAN, C. 20l7. The conciliation process. Accessed on August
1, 2019.

SUMAGUINA, I.B. 2000. Autonomous authority of Maranao

indigenous institutions on conflict resolution. CSSH
Graduate Research Journal, II (3-4), 213-224.