A Turn of the Tide in the Extraterritorial Application of Child Rights: On the French Approach towards ISIS’ Child Returnees
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are hundreds of children of French jihadists detained in northeast Syrian camps, being in direct danger of irreparable damage to their physical and psychological development. France has been denying the existence of any competence in Syria that could impose international obligations regarding these children. However, in November 2020, the Committee on the Rights of the Child decided in an individual communication procedure that the French State has jurisdiction over these children, marking a significant development in the extraterritorial application of human rights that is not immune to severe criticism. The Committee established that competence is found entirely upon a factual assessment and used the nationality of the children as a central criterion, posing arbitrariness concerns. The decision is nevertheless a decisive basis to uphold the positive obligation to protect child nationals, making the refusal of the State to systematically repatriate them less and less defensible. Finally, an understanding of security concerns was found to be crucial in a policy change. Any future decisions should therefore strike a better balance between public security and the rights of the child.
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 | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".