MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1591530496

AN UNRECOGNIZED STATE IN FOREIGN AND INTERNATIONAL COURTS: THE CASE OF THE REPUBLIC OF CHINA ON TAIWAN

2007· article· en· W1591530496 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pasha L. Hsieh

Bibliographic record

VenueMichigan Journal of International Law · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational courtChinaPolitical scienceLawInternational lawTribunalEconomic JusticeState (computer science)Political status of TaiwanMainland ChinaPublic international law
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Article provides a comparative analysis of the status of the Republic of China on Taiwan in foreign and international settings. Most existing literature written from the traditional public international law perspective focuses on Taiwan's separate statehood from China. This Article addresses an important pragmatic issue that international courts and courts in foreign countries frequently face: whether Taiwan is a "foreign State" for particular salutatory purposes in judicial proceedings. Part I of this Article provides an overview of China-Taiwan relations and the status of Taiwan under international law. I argue that the ROC on Taiwan has been a sovereign State since its creation in 1912 and was never "succeeded" by the PRC, which was established in 1949. By my analysis, both the ROC and the PRC are equal entities in the "divided China"; neither side belongs to the other. Part II examines the decisions of domestic courts that have addressed the status of Taiwan in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Japan. In these countries (which do not recognize Taiwan as an autonomous entity, but nonetheless maintain substantial "non-official" ties with it), domestic courts have employed various devices to ensure the State-like status of Taiwan, thus safeguarding the country's interests and allowing continued economic and diplomatic relations with the ROC. Consequently, judicial recognition of Taiwan's existence as a State has risen to the level of customary international law. Part III explores the possibility of Taiwan bringing suit as a "State" before the International Court of Justice, as a "fishing entity" before the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and as a "separate customs territory" in the dispute resolution mechanism of the World Trade Organization. This Article concludes that to avoid creating a global judicial "black hole," it is both necessary and pragmatic to officially deem Taiwan a State in judicial proceedings of any kind.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.011
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMichigan Journal of International LawSame topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207