Abstract:
Community mediation often borrows legal habits that stabilise outcomes yet can dim fairness cues residents rely on: warmth, voice, and local legitimacy. Anchored in Singapore’s ecosystem, this practice-led synthesis names that tension and offers a compact blueprint that mediation services can adopt without new funding. Three programme‑neutral rules are proposed: (a) to plan mixed-background co‑mediation roles; (b) to rotate the chair at phase boundaries; and (c) to run a two‑minute voice check before any caucus. The rules are paired with ready-to‑use scripts and a rubric for agreement quality focused on specificity, feasibility, verifiability, and a short review point. This article translates validated procedural justice items into a light-touch audit and derives three propositions for testing by mediation services in ordinary practice about sequencing, safeguards, and clarity. The article distinguishes the lawful floor from local participation, situates the blueprint within Asian community settings, and closes with a 90‑day evaluation sketch of the proposed blueprint that requires no personal content storage. This article’s contribution is a sequenced method that reconciles authority with authenticity in community rooms and invites practice‑based study across volunteer-anchored and hybrid mediation services.