"The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics": The Afghan Detainee and Omar Khadr Cases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper critically examines judicial decisions not to apply the Canadian Charter of Rights to the detention of prisoners by Canadian Forces in Afghanistan given allegations of torture and to reverse a remedy that Canada should request the US to repatriate a Canadian held at Guantanamo Bay. It also examines the Supreme Court's decision to apply the Charter to Omar Khadr's interrogation by Canadian officials at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba but to reverse a trial judge's decision that Canada must request Khadr's repatriation as the appropriate remedy for the unconstitutional interrogation. The paper concludes that the Supreme Court's reversal of the repatriation remedy and its refusal to hear the Afghan detainee case cannot be justified on normative or prudential grounds such as those defended by constitutional theorist Alexander Bickel.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.039 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.023 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".