Community Mediation as a Pathway to “Peace” — Toward the Restoration of Relationships

One of the greatest challenges faced by post-conflict societies is the rupture of relationships. Trust lost through experiences of violence, social structures that generate division, and the sense of powerlessness felt by those involved—these elements form deep rifts that cannot be repaired through laws or institutional reforms alone. In such contexts, community mediation has proven to be a powerful means of reconnecting people and rebuilding the social fabric.

Mediation is often perceived as a practical tool for coordinating interests or facilitating settlement. However, what we wish to highlight here is that mediation is more than a “technique for solving disputes”—it holds the transformative potential to change people’s inner worlds and their relationships themselves. Bush and Folger’s concept of Transformative Mediation is grounded precisely in this idea of “empowerment of self‑recovery” and “recognition of the other.” [1]

Through the mediation process, those who have been hurt by conflict or violence can regain a sense of agency and re‑recognize the other party as a human being. This transformation is a crucial foundation for sustainable peacebuilding.

---

[1] Bush, Robert A. B., and Joseph P. Folger. 2005. The Promise of Mediation: The Transformative Approach to Conflict. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.

The Sasakawa Peace Foundation is currently planning support for community mediation in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (BARMM), Philippines. In 2025, the Foundation conducted a rapid baseline study in collaboration with Conciliation Resources. The findings presented in Rapid Baseline Study – Community Mediation Practices in the Bangsamoro Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao　echo the transformative perspective described earlier.

BARMM is a region where multilayered and mutually reinforcing conflicts—such as disputes over land and resources, clan feuds (rido), political rivalries, and family-related issues—are deeply intertwined. Yet the narratives of mediators reveal a common thread: the purpose of mediation is to repair the damage to relationships at the root of conflict, and this objective is deeply connected to the cultural logic of the region.

Mediators in BARMM draw on community values—maratabat (honor), kinship, religious influence, and the weight of customary law—to create spaces where conflicting parties can return to “dialogue.” Mediators emphasize restoring relationships and seek win‑win solutions to prevent escalation.

From an external perspective, these processes may appear informal or overly flexible. Yet this very flexibility serves an important function: bridging the gap between formal institutions and local residents, thereby preventing conflict recurrence.

Mediators in BARMM come from diverse backgrounds—former combatants, religious leaders, women leaders, village elders, and local government officials. In societies accustomed to centralized systems, such layered authorities may seem overly complex. But perhaps this complexity itself is a latent strength. Multiple entry points and alternative mechanisms allow conflicts—beyond the capacity of the judicial system—to be resolved within community networks. This is one of the key benefits of community mediation revealed by the study.

The situation in BARMM resonates with community mediation practices in Nepal. Following its civil war, Nepal institutionalized mediation as part of state reconstruction, integrating it into local governance. This enabled the creation of a restorative space where residents could take ownership of conflicts and rebuild peace through dialogue within divided communities.

Despite cultural differences, both contexts share the effort to create spaces for relationship repair.
Key commonalities between Nepal and BARMM include:
 

• Mediation complements the limitations of formal institutions
• Cultural norms and customary practices underpin the legitimacy of mediation
• Trust in mediators determines sustainability
• Mediation prioritizes rebuilding social relationships
   

Mediation is a culturally embedded practice—far more deeply rooted than external actors may expect. It is precisely because it is culturally grounded that mediation can support the psychological recovery of individuals and promote the reorganization of social relationships within communities.

However, mediation is not without limits. The study in BARMM highlighted several operational challenges:
 

• Risks of political interference undermining neutrality
• Insufficient resources for mediators (transportation, record‑keeping tools, etc.)
• Limited participation of minorities such as women, youth, persons with disabilities, and Indigenous peoples
• Overreliance on the skills of a few individual mediators

These challenges are also seen in Nepal. While Nepal addressed them through institutionalization, BARMM lacks sufficient institutional support for mediators, creating risks to the sustainability of community mediation efforts.

How, then, should community mediation be strengthened in BARMM? The Sasakawa Peace Foundation aims to emphasize three areas in future programming:

1. Strengthening community relationships through mediation

• Promoting participation of women, youth, persons with disabilities, and Indigenous groups
• Building inclusive mediation spaces that embrace diverse values
• Rebuilding relationships to prevent conflict recurrence
   

2. Building bridges between institutions and communities

• Linking mediation activities with the government and judicial institutions
• Promoting institutional design that respects cultural norms and customary law
   

3. Providing sufficient support to mediators

• Ensuring support such as transportation, recording tools, and training
• Securing sustainable, non‑political funding to maintain neutrality
   

Mediation is not merely a tool for improving judicial efficiency; it is a form of social infrastructure essential for sustaining peace. It fosters psychological healing, reconstructs social relationships, and enhances community‑based conflict management capacities. Community mediation possesses the potential to cultivate “relational peace”—something that institutional reform alone cannot achieve.

The experiences from Nepal and BARMM provide valuable insights for shifting peacebuilding from a “system‑centered” to a “relationship‑centered” paradigm. The Sasakawa Peace Foundation will continue to respect the rich experiences and knowledge in BARMM while deepening the potential of community mediation and strengthening the link between policy and practice.