Conflicts and wars have long been recognised as threats to tangible cultural heritage. Well-known examples include the Buddhas of Bamiyan and the Mostar Bridge in Bosnia-Herzegovina, both of which show the importance of safeguarding such sites (see for example, Albert 2006: 32-33, Stanley-Price 2007b: 4-5). However, much less attention has been paid to intangible heritage in times of conflict, although the 2003 UNESCO Convention explicitly ascribes intangible cultural heritage an invaluable role ‘in bringing human beings closer together and ensuring exchange and understanding among them’, in other words, peace (UNESCO 2003; see also Albert 2006: 30, Albert and Gauer-Lietz 2006: 20, van Ginkel 2005: 25). The destruction of intangible cultural heritage (ICH) such as social and cultural structures, relationships and identities is usually not visible, thus much more difficult to detect, but potentially more grave in its consequences and more difficult to heal (compare Nordstrom 1997: 93). In this chapter, I argue that the destruction or disregard of ICH damages or ignores some of the very means needed to solve problems, prevent conflicts and for social reconstruction. In an era of ethnic and religious wars, one often seems to forget that religion and culture are not only (mis)used to mobilise people to fight each other. On the contrary, they can also help prevent and resolve violent conflict and enable reconciliation. To explore the subject further, this chapter aims to bring together the discourses on cultural heritage and traditional justice mechanisms as internationally recognised ‘peace tools’. To date, they have hardly crossed paths, although there are essential overlaps. This contribution looks into the question of whether it makes sense to declare traditional justice mechanisms as ‘cultural heritage’. Arguing for a progressive merging of the two discourses and a careful integration of traditional justice mechanisms into the body of internationally recognised ICH, the chapter draws on two case studies – East Timor and Indonesia. It reflects on shortcomings of traditional justice mechanisms and discusses the linking up of traditional justice and cultural heritage via one of the central features of both discourses: ritual performances. The chapter concludes with some challenges, problems and prospects of viewing traditional conflict resolution and justice mechanisms as part of Asia’s intangible cultural heritage and a critical part of dealing with conflicts and social unrest in parts of Asia.