This article describes the ways in which transitional justice work has helped constitute a predominant narrative about time in relation to violence, memory, and judgment. It suggests that transitional justice practices, institutions and discourses have coalesced into a form of ‘temporal governance’, which privileges a limited conception of the relationship between time and justice. Temporal governance posits linear progress narratives premised on ruptures between past and present and distinguishes traumatic, proximate pasts available for justice from more distant, irretrievable ones. These features potentially lead not only to less robust versions of the past but to more anaemic visions for the present and future. In the process, transitional justice practices may also marginalise accounts of multiple and plural temporalities. The article also discusses contemporary movements that attempt to defy the predominant form of temporal governance, particularly those focused on both the historic harms and continuing violence of colonialism, settler-colonialism, and slavery. These movements also reveal the difficulties of challenging temporal assumptions about intergenerational and structural harm, benefit, and responsibility. Precisely because the past is so central to contemporary struggles for justice, it is all the more important to scrutinise which past is centred, who defines it, and how it is remembered, judged, recognised, and mourned.

本文描述了过渡时期司法工作如何帮助构成与暴力、记忆和判断相关的时间的主要叙述。它表明，过渡时期的司法实践、制度和话语已经结合成一种“时间治理”的形式，它优先于时间与正义之间关系的有限概念。时间治理假设线性进展叙事以过去和现在之间的断裂为前提，并将可用于正义的创伤性、最近的过去与更遥远、无法挽回的过去区分开来。这些功能不仅可能导致过去版本不那么健壮，而且还会导致对现在和未来的看法更加苍白无力。在这个过程中，过渡时期的司法实践也可能会边缘化多重和多元时间性的描述。这篇文章还讨论了试图反抗主要形式的时间治理的当代运动，特别是那些同时关注殖民主义、定居者殖民主义和奴隶制的历史伤害和持续暴力的运动。这些运动还揭示了挑战关于代际和结构性损害、利益和责任的时间假设的困难。正因为过去在当代争取正义的斗争中如此重要，所以更重要的是仔细审查过去的中心，谁定义它，以及如何记住、判断、承认和哀悼它。这些运动还揭示了挑战关于代际和结构性损害、利益和责任的时间假设的困难。正因为过去在当代争取正义的斗争中如此重要，所以更重要的是仔细审查过去的中心，谁定义它，以及如何记住、判断、承认和哀悼它。这些运动还揭示了挑战关于代际和结构性损害、利益和责任的时间假设的困难。正因为过去在当代争取正义的斗争中如此重要，所以更重要的是仔细审查过去的中心，谁定义它，以及如何记住、判断、承认和哀悼它。