MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PIDANA KORPORASI DALAM PELANGGARAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA YANG BERAT

2011· article· id· W2267487079 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mahrus Ali

Bibliographic record

VenueJURNAL HUKUM IUS QUIA IUSTUM · 2011
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporationHuman rightsCriminal liabilityNormativePunishment (psychology)Political scienceCriminal lawLawHumanityCrimes against humanityLiabilityLaw and economicsInternational lawSociologyWar crimePsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research focuses on corporate criminal liability for gross violation of human rights. Based on normative legal research, this research reveals; first, extending criminal responsibility beyond individual to corporation for gross violation of human rights is required because national states are sometimes unwilling or powerless to properly sanction corporations for fear of negative economic consequences. Corporation also results serious or systematic human rights violations and encourages criminal conduct by maintaining a corporate culture that condones or even rewards violations of the law; second, Canada and Australia have opened a prosecutorial window by suing Unocal and Anvil Mining Limited as the perpetrator of crime against humanity; last, In Indonesia prosecuting corporation for human right violations will resulted into reformulation of criminal conduct of abetting, limitation of corporate responsibility and punishment and treatment.Key words : Corporation, criminal responsibility, gross violation of human rights

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.387
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.218 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJURNAL HUKUM IUS QUIA IUSTUMSame topicIndonesian Legal and Regulatory StudiesFrench-language works237,207