UNMASKING THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN DISCRETIONARY NATIONAL SECURITY DECISIONS IN CANADA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper explores three varied case studies within the author’s civil liberties legal practice that involve discretionary administrative decisions made in the name of public safety and/or national security. The first case study relates to the criminalization of dissent in the decision to prosecute a man who was attempting to attend a Parliamentary committee meeting based on the suspicion that he was a Greenpeace activist. The second case study considers the use of a public safety rationale for refusing the transfer of prisoners to Canada under the International Transfer of Offenders Act. And the final case study looks at the Public Safety Minister’s explanation for signing an immigration security certificate in 2008 that was tainted by torture. The author argues that, in each case, public safety or national security is raised to obfuscate the state’s unfair or discriminatory exercise of discretionary authority.
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 | 0.019 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".