Derechos humanos electorales: el caso Yatama contra el Estado de Nicaragua, análisis desde la perspectiva del sistema electoral costarricense
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In its first part this article discusses the background and process that the\nInter-American Court of Human Rights stated, from the standpoint of the Electoral\nLaw, in the decision ruled in the case of the indigenous political party Yatama vs. the\nState of Nicaragua when its participation in the 2000 municipal elections was not\npermitted. The second part of the article carries out an examination of the Costa\nRican legislation at the light of the violations identified by the Court, so to establish\nwhether such a ruling could have taken place or not within the institutional and legal\nCosta Rican context. Finally, an analysis of the peculiarities that distinguish the\nNicaraguan and the Costa Rican electoral system is carried out, specifically regarding\ntheir electoral courts, in order to conclude why a conflict of this type could have been\nresolved internally in Costa Rica, avoinding in principle a resolution like the one issued\nin the YATAMA case.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it