Les Droits Économiques Et Sociaux Dans Les Relations État–Particuliers Après Trente Ans D’Interprétation : Normes Juridiques Ou Énoncés Juridiques Symboliques? (Economic and Social Rights in the State-Individuals Relations after Thirty Years of Interpretation: Legal Norms or Symbolic Legal Statements)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: En 1975, le legislateur quebecois adoptait la Charte des droits et libertes de la personne, que le regrette professeur Andre Morel qualifiait de « document unique dans l’histoire legislative canadienne », notamment en raison de sa vaste portee. En effet, contrairement la plupart des conventions internationales de protection des droits, non seulement consacrait-elle les droits et libertes fondamentaux, le droit l’egalite, les droits politiques et judiciaires, mais elle reconnaissait aussi les droits economiques et sociaux. Rendu en 2002, l’arret Gosselin c. Quebec (Procureur general) de la Cour supreme, sans remettre en question la distinction entre les droits civils et les droits sociaux, marque un certain developpement en faveur d’une portee plus grande de ces derniers. Nous constaterons alors dans quelle mesure le plus haut tribunal du pays affirme la normativite des droits sociaux pour ensuite verifier, la lumiere du concept theorique de normativite juridique en droit positif, ce qu’il en est vraiment. Ainsi, l’heure ou la question du role de l’Etat dans la satisfaction des besoins essentiels des citoyens se pose avec urgence, je tenterai de determiner si les droits economiques et sociaux reconnus dans la Charte quebecoise constituent de veritables normes juridiques ou plutot de simples enonces juridiques symboliques.English Abstract: In 1975, the Quebec legislature adopted the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of the person, the late Professor Andre Morel called a unique document in the Canadian legislative history, especially because of its broad scope. Contrary to most international conventions protecting the rights, not only the new Charter protected the fundamental rights and freedoms, but also included equality, political and legal rights. It also recognized the economic and social rights. Decided in 2002, Gosselin v. Quebec (Attorney General) of the Supreme Court, without questioning the distinction between civil rights and social rights, marks certain development in favor of greater range of these rights. Then we will see how the highest court of the country asserts normativity of social rights and then verify in the light of the theoretical concept of legal normativity in positive law, what it really is. Thus, at time when the question of the role of the state in meeting the basic needs of citizens arises, I will try to determine whether the economic and social rights in the Quebec Charter are genuine legal norms or rather merely symbolic legal statements.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".