Peter Showler. Refugee Sandwich: Stories of Exile and Asylum
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Peter Showler. Refugee Sandwich: Stories of Exile and Asylum. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2006. 235 pp. $27.95 sc. There has long been a striking discrepancy between controversy that surrounds treatment of asylum seekers in Canada--especially by Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB), independent, quasi-judicial body that hears claims for protection against persecution--and paucity of works that add to our understanding of this policy area. Given his credentials, author of Refugee Sandwich would appear to be very well-positioned to make an important contribution in this respect, and he does so in a most unexpected and marked way. Showier has worked as an immigration and refugee lawyer, been both a member of IRB (1994-99) and its chairperson (1999-2002), and currently teaches immigration and refugee law at University of Ottawa. Through these various experiences he has seen most every aspect of refugee determination in Canada at close quarters. However, rather than write an analysis of that process or a memoir of his experiences working within it, he has instead created a unique insider's account in guise of a collection of short stories aimed at illustrat[ing] profoundly difficult process of communicating experience of refugees within a judicial context, a difficulty that is shared by all participants (xv). In taking this approach, Refugee Sandwich challenges any simplistic assessment of work of IRB, which tends in public discourse to be condemned for being either too generous or too cruel, and stimulates public debate on how effectiveness and fairness of refugee determination could be increased. The bulk of book consists of a baker's dozen of tales, fictionalized composites that draw on Showler's own experiences, which individually and collectively explore numerous complex ethical and procedural questions that can arise in deciding who deserves Canada's protection and who does not. Although high-stakes nature of refugee determination readily lends itself to a dramatized style, effectiveness of this approach depends on author's ability not only to present a compelling and informed narrative, but also to lead readers themselves to experience the great difficulty and sometimes impossibility of deciding refugee claims accurately (210). And in this, Showler excels. Consider, for example, Excluding Manuel. Manuel is a refugee claimant suspected of complicity in crimes against humanity while serving in police force of an unnamed country. His case has already been heard once but due to inability of Board and Minister to even approximate compliance with their own procedures (20), his initial rejection has been quashed by courts; seven years after his arrival in Canada, his case is about to be heard again. …
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,003 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,042 | 0,012 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».