Illicit Exploitation of Natural Resources - Art. 28L Bis of the Malabo Protocol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Article 28A(1)(13) of the Protocol to the Statute of the African Court of Justice and Human Rights lists ‘Illicit exploitation of natural resources’ as a criminal offense within the Court’s jurisdiction. In conjunction with the new mandate of the African Court, which includes the exercise of jurisdiction over corporations for the first time in an international treaty, the prohibition of “illicit exploitation of natural resources” creates an offense with especially sharp teeth, for business people, their corporations, military actors and politicians. The crime constitutes an important innovation in international law, since it offers a distinct legal basis for prosecution of a wider array of acts covered by the war crime of pillage. Nonetheless, it also comes with a set of major limitations, not the least of which is its great vagueness. This chapter offers a critical doctrinal overview of the seven sub-offenses that fall within the wider banner of this new crime of Illicit Exploitation, simultaneously pointing to a range of interpretative possibilities that might accord with recent thinking about the relationship between law and resource predation.
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 | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.042 | 0.022 |
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".