The Supreme Court (SC) has started enforcing the upgraded Rule on Family Mediation to expedite the resolution of disputes among family members, relatives by blood or by marriage, and parties in common-law relationships.
The rule, approved by the SC in Administrative Matter No. 24-02-06, was made public on Wednesday, Jan. 8.
The SC said the rule “aims to address the emerging need for family mediation, both domestic and international; enhance the efficiency of family courts; reduce court backlogs; and promote the best interests of the child.”
It said that family mediation is a “process in which a mediator, acting as an impartial third party, facilitates the resolution of family disputes and helps the parties in reaching voluntary agreements.”
It pointed out that family mediation, “a non-adversarial process, should include children and give them a chance to share their thoughts on issues that impact them.”
In a press briefer, the SC’s Public Information Office (SC-PIO) said that the rule is limited to suits between spouses; parents and children; other ascendants and descendants; siblings; relatives within the fourth civil degree of consanguinity (by blood) or affinity (by marriage); and parties in a common-law, dating or sexual relationship, former or present.
Cases that can be referred for family mediation are (a) those involving issues under the Family Code and other laws which can be the subject of a compromise agreement, such as support, custody, visitation, property relations, and guardianship; (b) settlement of intestate estates (estates without a will); (c) cross-border disputes in international child abduction, support, custody and visitation, guardianship, and other civil cases involving children filed in the Philippines between a Filipino resident and a citizen of a member country of the Council of ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) Chief Justices (CACJ); and (d) other civil cases or civil aspect of criminal cases where mediation is allowed by law, rules, and international conventions or agreements between parties covered by the Rule.
Cases not subject to family mediation are (a) civil cases that cannot be the subject of a compromise, such as the civil status of persons, validity of a marriage or legal separation, grounds for legal separation, future support, a court’s jurisdiction, and future legitime, or the portion of an estate reserved by law for heirs; (b) habeas corpus, unless it relates to custody of minors; (c) violations under the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their Children Act; and (d) all cases involving issues under the Family Code with applications for protection/restraining orders or preliminary injunctions.
As an exception, the SC-PIO said that cases under (a), (c), and (d) and those falling under the Rule on International Child Abduction Cases may be referred to family mediation if the parties have agreed to undergo mediation for some other aspect of their case, such as the custody of minor children, separation of property, or support pendente lite (support granted while a case is pending).
It said that the parties in cases covered by the rule, except cross-border disputes, “must first undergo a dispute resolution process and attempt to reach an amicable settlement before filing any court action.”
“If the parties do not reach a settlement and a case is filed, the court, after the pre-trial conference and once the issues have been joined, shall direct the parties to undergo mandatory family mediation as a final attempt to settle the dispute.”
Under the rule, statements made during family mediation cannot be used as evidence in court unless otherwise agreed upon. Also, recording in any form by the family mediator is prohibited.
Also, the rule states that support services may be provided to parties or minors while undergoing family mediation, including physical or psychological services and counseling.
The SC-PIO said the other salient provisions of the rule:
“The mediation period of 30 days must be strictly observed unless the court approves an extension of not more than 30 days.
“The parties and their counsel shall personally appear for mediation unless a duly authorized representative appears with a special power of attorney (SPA).
“If practicable and upon motion, the court may allow videoconference mediation, following the videoconferencing guidelines approved by the SC.
“The Rule also covers other aspects of the family mediation process, such as suspension and termination, withdrawal of the family mediator, effects of refusal to undergo family mediation, and imposition of sanctions.
“The Rule likewise provides for the qualifications, training, and accreditation, as well as the ethical standards and conduct, for family mediators.”
The SC-PIO said that in 2023, the SC Committee on Family Courts and Juvenile Courts, headed by Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier, created the Sub-Technical Working Group on Rule on Family Mediation (Sub-TWG) to revise the Rule on Court-Annexed Family Mediation and Code of Ethical Standards for Mediators.
The Sub-TWG submitted its first draft of the rule to the SC as a full court on Jan. 31, 2024. Pending the SC’s approval of the rule, the SC and the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia entered a Memorandum of Understanding on Judicial Cooperation (MOU).
A pioneer activity under the MOU was the Study Visit on Access to Justice of Disadvantaged Groups, Family Mediation, and Social Services and Counseling in Melbourne and Sydney, Australia, organized by the SC and the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Government of Australia through its Fostering Advancement of Inclusive and Right-Based Justice (FAIR Justice) Program.
The study visit was attended by members of the Philippine Judiciary, led by Associate Justice Lazaro-Javier, from August 7 to 11, 2024. Its main highlights were discussions and immersions on Australia’s good practices on family mediation and the selection of applicants, training, and accreditation of family mediators.
The draft rule was later revised to incorporate information and learnings from the study visit, such as the concepts of child-inclusive practice, and victim and culture sensitivity.