Bibliographic record
Abstract
Point of fact, legislature is seen to be a significant body in any country because of its key duties of passing the legislations regarding the responsibility it has. The national and legal system has given legal protections for the legislature’ members in order to help them in carrying out the responsibility they have according to the countries’ constitutions, and this kind of protection is known to be the parliament immunity. The present study aims to clarify the parliamentary immunity concept explaining its own legal nature among Arab constitutions. Additionally, this study discusses important points related to the parliament immunity such as its types, namely, objective type as well as procedural type differentiating between them. Furthermore, this study indicates to some important aspects regarding parliament immunity among Arabs highlighting points like the lifting procedures of the immunity and some legal reasons for lifting and the constitutions’ positions regarding that. The study concludes that Arab countries have a special situation due to important events such as Arab Spring and Palestinian Issue in which they confirm that the Arab countries must deal with the parliament immunity carefully in a way that makes their people satisfied, lastly, some recommendations are made for further studies in the same topic.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".