Sovereignty and Canadian-Nigerian Human Rights Engagements: Some Theoretical Reflections
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article attempts to draw some theoretical insights from the Canada-Nigeria human rights engagement from 1999 to 2011. Canada and Nigeria claim to seek cooperation on the principles of sovereign equality. What, then, is sovereignty and sovereign equality? The article will attempt to address the various approaches to theorizing sovereignty in four broad conceptual categories – sovereignty as State power and authority; sovereignty as the power and authority of the people; sovereignty as equality; and sovereignty as responsibility to protect. The nature of the Canada-Nigeria engagements in human rights is scrutinized under two main themes – first, engagements in the political, economic spheres are examined; and second, engagements in the field of human rights. Theoretical insights that can be drawn from the Canada-Nigeria engagement in the field of human rights are next discussed and some conclusions from the discussions in the article are drawn.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 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) | 0.012 | 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 it