MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110772548 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v14n1p73

Constructive Arrest: An Analysis of the Case of PP v Mohd Safwan Husain

2020· article· en· W3110772548 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Muhamad Helmi Md Said, Sahanah Kathirvelu, Lim Jia Min, Nur Aryannie Abd Rahim, Nur Wafda Asyrani Jamaie, Iman Camelia Abdullah Firuz, Zulkarnain Abdullah

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLinguistic, Cultural, and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
KeywordsConstructiveLawCriminal codeNorm (philosophy)Criminal lawCode (set theory)Perspective (graphical)SociologyPolitical scienceSet (abstract data type)MathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

After the landmark principle in Shaaban & Ors v. Chong Fook Kam & Anor that established a different set of definition for arrest in Malaysia Criminal Procedure Law in 1969, the case of Pendakwa Raya lwn. Mohd Safwan Husain again stirred the definition of arrest in the year of 2017. While it has long been a norm in this area of law to differentiate arrest into actual and constructive arrest, the judgment of Mohd Safwan Husain commented the differentiation critically. This paper aims to analyse the arrest happened in the case of Mohd Safwan Husain thoroughly, not only from the perspective of Criminal Procedure Code, but also from the view of Dangerous Drugs Act. Research method used are library research and case analysis. As for now there is no governing law on constructive arrest, the researchers believe that an explanation should be provided on what constitutes a constructive arrest in the Criminal Procedure Code and the present existing provision which is Section 15 Criminal Procedure Code should be amended.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.877

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicLinguistic, Cultural, and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207