Les identités multiples et le droit des réfugiés (Identity Markers and Refugee Law)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans le domaine du droit, les marqueurs d'identite tels la race, la religion, le sexe ou l'orientation sexuelle sont frequemment utilises pour creer des categories juridiques et legislatives. Cependant, il faut s'assurer d'utiliser les marqueurs d'identite convenablement pour bien comprendre les experiences de personnes appartenant aux groupes cibles. L'auteure examine le processus de revendication du statut de refugie de la Loi sur l'immigration et la protection des refugies pour evaluer si les categories d'identite, telles que definies a l'heure actuelle, permettent a la Commission d'immigration et du statut de refugie d'evaluer de maniere systematique tous les motifs et moyens de persecution dont sont victimes les revendicateurs et revendicatrices. L'auteure se penche particulierement sur les revendications d'asile soulevant le sexe et l'orientation sexuelle, pour evaluer, a la lumiere de la jurisprudence recensee, si les demandes d'asiles reconnaissent le recoupement entre ces deux differents marqueurs d'identite. Sur le plan de l'application de toute loi, l'auteure fait valoir qu'il est essentiel d'identifier les points de recoupement entre les differents marqueurs d'identite pour permettre aux personnes de presenter fidelement leur vecu et leur identite intersectionnelle. Il est donc suggere de rendre plus visible les liens entre le sexe et l'orientation sexuelle dans le contexte du droit des refugies.In legal discourse, identity markers such as race, religion, gender, or sexual orientation are often used to create judicial and legislative categories. However, we must ensure that we adequately use the identity markers to understand properly the experiences of people in target groups. The author addresses the refugee status claim process of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to determine if the identity categories, as currently defined, allow the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada to systematically evaluate all the motives and ways of persecution for which claimants are victims. The author specifically examines the asylum claims invoking gender and sexual orientation to determine, in light of cases cited, whether the asylum claims recognise the intersection of these two identity markers. As for the enforcement of all laws, the author indicates that it is essential to identify the intersections between the various identity markers to allow people to faithfully expose their personal experiences and their intersectional identity. It is therefore suggested that the links between gender and sexual orientation should be more visible in the context of refugees' rights.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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".