MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046946144 · doi:10.7202/1005134ar

L’immunité de l’acte de fonction et la responsabilité pénale pour crimes internationaux des gouvernants en exercice

2011· article· fr· W2046946144 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Alain-Guy Tachou-Sipowo

Bibliographic record

VenueMcGill Law Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Avec la création des tribunaux pénaux internationaux des Nations Unies et l’entrée en vigueur le 1er juillet 2002 du Traité de Rome instituant la Cour pénale internationale, le statut pénal des hauts fonctionnaires des États en droit international est devenu difficile à saisir. Le caractère impératif des normes qui fondent la répression des crimes de jus cogens tend à effacer, dans l’imagerie des défenseurs des droits de la personne, la distinction entre la responsabilité des gouvernants en exercice et celle des anciens dirigeants. Or le droit international est demeuré westphalien sur la question. L’auteur démontre que pour cette catégorie de personnes, une immunité devant les tribunaux étrangers subsiste. Il soutient aussi que la contribution de la justice pénale internationale au changement de paradigme est limitée du point de vue de la nature des crimes poursuivis et de la compétence des tribunaux internationaux devant lesquels la qualité officielle n’est pas admissible comme moyen de défense.

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)0.007
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMcGill Law JournalSame topicInternational Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207