Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Hosting by the UQ Law School and the Asia-Pacific Centre for the Responsibility to Protect (R2P Centre), the theme was Justice and Prevention of Genocide.The conference was a resounding success, attending by almost 200 scholars from around the world.Papers were delivered on topics ranging from the Armenian Genocide to the Indonesian atrocities of 1965, climate change, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), and Indigenous genocides.The latter topic was particularly relevant given the host country, Australia, and its history as a colonised land, leading to massacres of local Aboriginal populations, removal of Aboriginal children from their families, 1 and ongoing inequalities between Aboriginal and other populations today.One of the keynote speakers was a local Aboriginal elder, Lilla Watson, who opened the conference at the Welcome Event.Her keynote was particularly poignant and moving, detailing the impact of colonisation on Aboriginal people, and the personal connection for her with these atrocities.Three of the other keynote speeches are included in this special issue.Alex Bellamy, Director of the R2P Centre, and foremost expert on R2P, spoke on 'Holding Back the Tide?Human Protection and Genocide Prevention in our More Violent World', where atrocity prevention is key in a time of global conflict.William Smith, the Deputy Co-Prosecutor of the ECCC, spoke about the different types of evidence required to prove atrocities at the ECCC, with a particular focus on the importance of the work of scholars in the field and the role they played in the trial.Robert Cribb talked about the limits of historical guilt over atrocities, with specific reference to the case of Japan in WWII and its post-war relations with the West.A screening of the film 'Denial' at IAGS2017 was particularly relevant and timely, given that, only two months before the conference, Holocaust denial flyers were found on the campus of UQ, as well as other Australian universities. 2Included in this special issue are the three talks from panellists Henry Theriault, Kirril Shields and Ted Nanicelli, who analysed different aspects of the film and the continuing problem of genocide denial.Drawing from the theme of IAGS2017, this special issue contains five articles focused on the theme of justice for and prevention of genocide.Judith Rafferty's empirical research in Rwanda examines the needs and desires of women victims of sexual violence during the 1994 genocide, for whom 'justice' takes many different perspectives.Rebecca Gidley and Matthew Turner's piece looks at the role of historians as expert witnesses in trials for international crimes, comparing West Germany Holocaust trials with those of the ECCC and the Bangladesh Tribunal, and the challenges that are presented from this very specific category of expert witness.Caroline Bennett's interviews with Cambodians have explored how the Cambodians view the concept of 'karma' within the justice and reconciliation landscape in post-Khmer Rouge Cambodia.Katherine Southwick touches upon one of the most current genocidal cases-the Rohingya-presenting a sociology of law perspective as to why the international community has failed to act to prevent the genocide in Myanmar.Finally, Bjoern Schiffbauer considers the concept of 'naming and shaming' as a method of genocide prevention, and where the challenges lie in its effectiveness as a prevention option under the Genocide Convention.Thus, there is a balance in the articles between the two main concepts of 'justice' and 'prevention'; two equally important concepts, and inherently connected to each other: justice steps in where prevention fails, justice is rarely needed where prevention succeeds, and justice itself is a form of prevention.As a human rights and international criminal lawyer, a majority of my work is focused on prosecution of perpetrators of atrocities and human rights violations.That is, it is focused on justice.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».