Legitimacy Cycles vs
Transitional Justice
Transitional justice addresses post-conflict reconciliation. Legitimacy Cycles (LGIT) asks: how should institutions respond differently to grievances at different temporal phases?
What Transitional Justice Got Right
Transitional justice represents decades of careful development: truth commissions, reparations frameworks, institutional reform mechanisms. It provides proven tools for societies emerging from conflict or authoritarianism.
LGIT doesn't replace transitional justice—it extends the analytical frame to address ongoing legitimacy questions that TJ mechanisms weren't designed to handle.
The Four Temporal Phases
LGIT identifies four distinct phases of grievance, each requiring different institutional responses. Transitional justice typically addresses only the first two.
Active Injustice
Ongoing harm with identifiable perpetrators and victims
Response: Immediate intervention, structural change
Residual Disparity
Direct effects persist after active injustice ends
Response: Targeted remediation, capability restoration
Legacy Grievance
Historical harm with descendant effects
Response: Acknowledgment, symbolic repair, prevented recurrence
Overextended Grievance
Claims that exceed causal connection to original harm
Response: Recognition limits, legitimacy boundaries
The Analytical Gap LGIT Addresses
Transitional justice provides mechanisms. LGIT provides temporal analysis.
Transitional Justice
Established mechanisms for post-conflict reconciliation: truth commissions, reparations, institutional reform, memorialization.
Legitimacy Cycles (LGIT)
Analytical framework for how grievances evolve through time and what institutional responses are appropriate at each phase.
When Grievances Outlast Their Basis
How should institutions respond when grievance claims extend beyond their causal connection to original harm?
The Legitimacy Decay Problem
Grievance-based claims carry moral authority. But that authority is not static—it evolves through time as conditions change. LGIT provides language for this evolution:
Active Injustice
Full moral authority. Immediate response required.
Residual Disparity
Strong moral claim. Remediation appropriate.
Legacy Grievance
Recognition valid; reparations complex.
Overextended Grievance
Claims exceed causal connection. Boundaries needed.
The LGIT Contribution
LGIT provides analytical tools for distinguishing between legitimate grievance that requires institutional response and overextended claims that may actually undermine the legitimacy of genuine grievance.
- •Temporal phase analysis: where is this grievance in its lifecycle?
- •Causal connection assessment: does the claim connect to identifiable harm?
- •Response calibration: what institutional response is appropriate at this phase?
How They Compare in Practice
Historical Land Claims
Apply truth commission; acknowledge harm; offer compensation
Analyse temporal phase; Active Injustice requires remediation, Legacy Grievance requires different response
Institutional Discrimination
Document violations; recommend reforms
Identify current phase; Residual Disparity requires structural change, Overextended Grievance requires different treatment
Ongoing Injustice
May fall outside TJ mandate
Active Injustice requires immediate intervention regardless of historical framing
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Transitional Justice | Legitimacy Cycles |
|---|---|---|
| Temporal Scope | Discrete transition period | Continuous lifecycle analysis |
| Grievance Treatment | Binary (valid/invalid) | Four temporal categories |
| Institutional Response | Uniform mechanisms | Phase-specific responses |
| Decay Recognition | Legitimacy assumed static | Legitimacy decays over time |
| Legal Framework | Established international law | Analytical framework |
| Political Application | Post-conflict resolution | Ongoing governance |
Explore Legitimacy Cycles
Learn how to analyse grievances through temporal phases.