MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights

2018· book-chapter· en· W2909253782 on OpenAlex
Nicole de Silva

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2018
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawPolitical scienceInternational courtHuman rightsInternational lawInternational human rights lawMandatePrecedentCommon lawPublic international law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter examines international courts’ premises as objects of international law through the case of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights. When creating an international court, states become legally obligated to supply its physical premises—a functional and symbolic resource that underpins the court’s legal authority and influence. Drawing on archival evidence, this chapter analyses the African Court’s significant challenges in securing this important resource from political actors within the African Union and Tanzania, the court’s host state. It shows that, with international law and courts, there can be a considerable gap between states’ commitment and compliance, and between legal ambition and political reality. This gap, however, can mobilize court officials to assert their needs for resources and, more generally, the significance of their mandate. Examining international courts’ premises, therefore, can elucidate the tensions between law and politics embedded in international justice specifically and international law more broadly.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.214 · 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