Introduction: Papua's prolonged asymmetric conflict illustrates the limitations of formal legal mechanisms in generating legitimacy and facilitating dialogue between state institutions, indigenous communities, and non-state actors. The Bakar Batu tradition provides an important customary setting for reconciliation and intergroup dialogue, yet its legal significance within Indonesia's plural legal order remains insufficiently examined. Purposes of the Research: This study examines the role and juridical position of Bakar Batu as a customary mediation practice in asymmetric conflict resolution and analyzes the extent to which its customary authority can interact with Indonesia's constitutional and statutory framework. Methods of the Research: The study employs a socio-legal qualitative case-study approach focusing on the SusiAir hostage crisis. Empirical data were obtained through semi-structured interviews with customary leaders, government officials, indigenous community representatives, and customary-law scholars, complemented by analysis of constitutional provisions, legislation, judicial decisions, and relevant secondary sources. Legal pluralism and Turner's concept of liminality were used as analytical frameworks. Results of the Research: The findings indicate that Bakar Batu functions primarily as a culturally legitimate mediation space that facilitates communication, reduces perceived power asymmetries, and strengthens social relationships among actors. Its significance lies less in replacing state law than in complementing formal mechanisms through culturally grounded legitimacy. The study identifies a gap between constitutional recognition of customary communities and the institutional mechanisms available to connect customary mediation with formal conflict-resolution processes.