Challenging International Justice: The Initial Years of the International Criminal Court’s Intervention in Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This practice note describes and critiques the initial years of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) involvement in Uganda from the perspective of local civil society actors. It argues that the substance and process of the ICC’s intervention fell chronically short of generating justice for those who had lived with the conflict for over two decades, and therefore created a disconnect between the priorities of those on the ground, and the priorities of the Court and its international minders. In order to unravel some of the dynamics that underpinned this disconnect, the paper asserts that the pivotal relationship between citizen and state provides a lens through which to assess any approach to generating justice in Uganda. It concludes that those promoting international justice need to be more cognisant of the fact that international justice mechanisms are obsolete unless they can move from theory to practice and make a genuine difference in people’s lives. In this regard, a better understanding and awareness of the political and social context in which they are operating, as well as greater self-critique and honesty, is critical.
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 | 0.022 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.042 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.027 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".