De Estados Unidos a Canadá: La búsqueda de justicia transnacional avanza hacia el norte
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay explores the slow death of the Alien Tort Statute in the United States and the use of Canadian courts as an alternative for victims of human rights abuses seeking a court wiling to entertain extraterritorial claims. In Kiobel, the U.S. Supreme Court eliminated all ATCA cases originating from a foreign-based controversy, save those that closely “touch and concern” the United States. At roughly the same time, Canadian courts have begun to entertain cases against foreign states that sponsor terrorism, Canadian mining companies accused of complicity in human rights violations committed abroad, and enforcement of foreign judgments. In addition, at least one high-profile Canadian firm has engaged in a unique alternative dispute resolution mechanism aimed at providing compensation for serious criminal activity and the government of Canada is encouraging similarly situated Canadian firms to do the same thing. Taken as a whole, the shift from the U.S. to Canada for this form of justice is likely to 1) promote a tighter nexus between U.S. and Canadian based human rights violators and any court likely to sit in civil judgment of such actions, and 2) deny victims of atrocities that do not fit into select categories any opportunity at redress.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".