MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2507249400

Derechos Humanos y Penas Radicales: ¿Crítica o Justificación? La Recepción del Derecho Internacional Humanitario en el Código Penal Colombiano (Human Rights and Radical Punishment: Criticism or Justification? The Reception of International Humanitarian Law in the Colombian Criminal Code)

2015· article· es· W2507249400 on OpenAlexaff
Camilo Eduardo Umaña Hernández, Álvaro P. Pires

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Penology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDerechoHumanitiesRight to lifePolitical scienceContradictionPunishment (psychology)Criminal lawLawHuman rightsPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spanish Abstract: Este articulo aborda la relacion entre los derechos humanos y el derecho punitivo, centrandose en el aspecto de las penas consagradas en el ordenamiento penal. A traves de la conceptualizacion de las penas radicales este trabajo busca observar aquellas penas que estan en contradiccion fundamental con los valores positivos que la sociedad pretende salvaguardar a traves de la punicion, y que son radicalmente indiferentes a la vida del individuo declarado responsable por un delito. En este sentido se trazan algunas reflexiones sobre como reconstituir el derecho penal para adecuarlo a los valores propios de los derechos humanos, conservando una aptitud critica antes que justificativa de estos ultimos. Atendiendo a esta reflexion, el presente articulo estudia la recepcion del DIH en el Codigo Penal colombiano a traves de un estudio de las escalas punitivas asi como del sustento iusfilosofico de las mismas, para reflexionar sobre la operacion de las penas radicales frente a la legislacion.English Abstract: This article discusses the relationship between human rights and criminal law, focusing on the matter of the penalties enshrined in the criminal laws. Through the conceptualization of radical punishment this paper seeks to observe those penalties involving a fundamental contradiction with the positive values that a society in general and particularly the criminal law system seeks to safeguard through punishment, and that are at the same time radically indifferent to the right to (biological and social) life of the individual responsible for a crime. In this regard, the paper offers some considerations on how to reconstitute the criminal law to suit human rights’ values while maintaining a critical attitude of the latter rather than a justificatory approach. In this line of thought, the article focuses on the reception of the International Humanitarian Law (IHL) in the Colombian Penal Code reflecting on the operation of radical punishment before punitive scales as well as the jus philosophical fundament.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.370
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicCriminal Justice and PenologyFrench-language works237,207