Nation Tsilhqot’in c Colombie-Britannique : bonne décision, mauvaises raisons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le qualificatif est galvaudé, mais l’arrêt de la Cour suprême du Canada dans l’affaire Nation Tsilhqot’in c Colombie-Britannique est véritablement « historique ». Il représente la première reconnaissance judiciaire, concrète, formelle et définitive d’un titre constitutionnel autochtone ancestral dans l’histoire du droit canadien. Il dissipe les principaux doutes sur la crédibilité du contrôle judiciaire des droits constitutionnels que la partie II de la Loi constitutionnelle de 1982 garantit aux peuples autochtones. Or, au-delà de quelques précisions utiles, sa motivation est sérieusement problématique, et ce, à maints égards. Relativement aux droits constitutionnels des peuples autochtones, la plupart des erreurs de la Cour proviennent de la manière dont, sur nombre de questions fondamentales, elle se fonde principalement sur l’arrêt Guerin. À l’égard du droit relatif à la résolution des conflits de compétences attribuées au sein de la fédération, les nombreuses erreurs, conceptuelles notamment, que consignent les motifs de la juge en chef sont symptomatiques de problèmes encore plus profonds.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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".