Reconciling Indigenous peoples with the judicial process: An examination of the recent genocide and sexual slavery trials in Guatemala and their integration of Mayan culture and customs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines two recent landmark cases in Guatemala. The first one is the 2013 Rios Montt genocide case, which led to one of the first convictions of a former Head of State for genocide in a national court. The second one is the 2016 Sepur Zarco case, which marked the first time former military commanders were convicted in a national court of crimes against the duties of humanity for sexual and domestic slavery. In both cases, almost all the victims were Indigenous. The author was present for parts of both trials as an international observer and interviewed individuals directly involved in the prosecution. Considering that Guatemalan and international law require that legal decisions give due consideration to the customs of the Indigenous peoples concerned, the article assesses to what extent Indigenous culture was taken into account during the trial and how Indigenous concepts and customs were considered in the judgements. In both cases, the tribunal did not modify usual court procedures, except to provide interpreters for the testimony of the unilingual Q’eqchi and Ixil witnesses. Both judgements did, however, take into account several concepts and customs from the Mayan worldview and these were key to the Court’s reasoning leading to the guilty verdicts.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".