South Africa’s Withdrawal from The Rome Statute: A Note on Democratic Alliance v. Minister of International Relations and Cooperation and Others
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Africa and the International Criminal Court (ICC) are having a turbulent relationship, since the implication of the Sudanese President Omar A-Bashir by the Court with the atrocities committed in the Darfur region. The attitude of African countries against the Court has led to some rampaging voices, calling for an African solidarity to exit the ICC. Few African countries, including South Africa, have stepped to the plate responding to the call. However, the process has been coated with uncertainties, mostly leading to constitutional power wrangle among the constitutional branches of governance. The High Court of South Africa, for instance, has been the ‘mediator’ when the executive and legislature clashed over South Africa’s pursuance to withdraw from the ICC. Thus, this commentary revisits the case of Democratic Alliance v. Minister of International Relations and Cooperation and Others, and exposes the power ‘wrangle’ between the executive and legislature when South Africa engineered her failed exit from the ICC.
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 | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.022 | 0.024 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".