Access to justice and self-determination are goals central to the export of U.S.-style mediation. Ideologically, structurally, and practically, however, U.S.-style mediation programs individualize and depoliticize conflict; centralize and homogenize law and dispute resolution; and eschew the assertion of rights. Using community mediation in the Philippines as an example, the author argues, that access to justice and self-determination in post-colonial settings require counterhegemonic practices driven by a normative agenda that collectivizes and socializes conflict; respects and improves upon indigenous dispute-resolution; and recognizes fundamental human rights.