Justicia constitucional y derechos fundamentales del pueblo y el Estado de Quebec: a propósito del "Asunto Henderson"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
espanolEste articulo trata de la demanda que puso Keith Owen Henderson –dirigente del Equality Party, partido de Quebec que defendia la unidad nacional canadiense– a la Fiscalia General de Quebec en la que solicitaba que se declarara la inconstitucionalidad de algunas disposiciones de la Ley sobre el ejercicio de los derechos fundamentales y de las prerrogativas del pueblo de Quebec y del Estado de Quebec, que fue aprobada por la Asamblea Nacional de Quebec en 2000 y entro en vigor en 2016. El autor narra la secuencia de hechos que llevaron a la aprobacion de dicha ley como una respuesta del legislativo quebequense a la Ley de Claridad federal sobre los refrendos. En nombre del Tribunal Supremo de Quebec la jueza Claude Dallair emitio el 18 de abril de 2018 una sentencia en la que rechaza la demanda de Henderson con argumentos que contienen grandes errores de Derecho, confundiendo legislador y gobierno, asimilando el pueblo al Estado y moviendose mas en el terreno politico. EnglishThis paper deals with the lawsuit put by Keith Owen Henderson –leader of the Equality Party, a Quebec party defending Canadian national unity– to the Quebec Public Prosecutor’s Office requesting the unconstitutionality of certain provisions of the Law on the exercise of fundamental rights and the prerogatives of the people of Quebec and the State of Quebec, which was approved by the National Assembly of Quebec in 2000 and came into force in 2016. The author narrates the sequence of events that led to the approval of this law as a response of the Quebec Legislature to the federal Clarity Act on endorsements. On behalf of the Supreme Court of Quebec Judge Claude Dallair issued on April 18, 2018 a ruling in which he rejected Henderson’s lawsuit with arguments that contain large errors of law, confusing legislator and government, assimilating the people to the state and moving more in the political field.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".