The concept of procedural justice has been promoted as a potential solution in the contest for resources involving indigenous peoples and others. It seeks the formulation of processes that are fair and just both to indigenous peoples and to the other parties affected. Using a comparative approach, this paper analyses processes and mechanisms adopted in some selected common law jurisdictions against the ideal of procedural justice. It seeks to consider mechanisms which conform to the principle of procedural justice to address the issue of indigenous peoples’ rights to land and resources in Malaysia. The principle is relevant in Malaysian common law which also subjects matters affecting fundamental liberties to procedural justice. Comparative perspectives provide models for practical applications of indigenous peoples’ rights. They assist policy analysis through learning from the successes and failures of other jurisdictions in improving legal reform.