Since 2005, the Magistrate’s Courts in Ghana have offered ‘alternative dispute resolution’ for litigants preferring settlement through mediation. To what extent does this state-supported alternative provide justice congruent with popular values and expectations, or in a more expeditious and accessible form than that offered by litigation ? A study found the programme genuinely accessible, offering enforceable agreements and fulfilling popular desires for dispute settlement as a ‘truth-seeking’ and balanced process. Crucially, state institutions played the role of ‘practical hybrids,’ combining the necessary authority, organisational support, and professional mediation skills with responsiveness to shared popular values and expectations. Nevertheless, the process has proved less effective than judicial service reformers and their development partners had expected, since mediators have faced considerable resistance in achieving agreements, settling only 54% of mediated disputes on average.