Jen Moore c. el Ministerio del Interior del Peru et al (informe de amicus curiae) (Jen Moore v. Minister of the Interior of Peru et al (Amicus Curiae Brief))
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
Spanish Abstract: Este informe de amicus curiae expone un analisis de derecho internacional para la consideracion del Juzgado que preside de la demanda de habeas corpus interpuesta en favor de la ciudadana canadiense Jennifer Moore, contra el Ministerio del Interior, la Policia Nacional del Peru, el Departamento de Seguridad del Estado de la PNP del Departamento del Cusco, y la oficina regional de la Superintendencia Nacional de Migraciones. El informe brinda informacion al Juzgado sobre los instrumentos de derecho internacional y de politica que resultan relevantes en relacion con los aspectos de derechos humanos de la demanda en favor de Jennifer Moore. Con el fin de identificar la normativa del derecho internacional de derechos humanos aplicable en este caso, empieza con una revison de los documentos oficiales pertinentes, respecto a las acciones de los Demandados al detener a Moore y prohibirle subsiguientemente su reentrada a Peru. Sobre la base de la informacion examinada, concluimos que las acciones y decisiones de los Demandados violan los derechos de libertad de expresion (articulo 13), libertad de asociacion (articulo 16) y libertad de circulacion (articulo 22), protegidos por la Convencion Americana sobre Derechos Humanos. Adicionalmente, senalamos que las razones esgrimidas por los Demandados para la prohibicion impuesta a Moore, en las circunstancias de este caso, tienen el potencial de afectar adversamente los derechos humanos de quienquiera que visite el Peru con visa turistica, y comparta informacion o exprese puntos de vista criticos de la PNP o de las companias mineras extranjeras. Esto pone de relieve la importancia internacional de este caso. English Abstract: This amicus curiae brief offers international law analysis to the Primer Juzgado Penal con Reos Libres in Cuzco Peru in relation to the Court’s consideration of Canadian citizen Jennifer Moore’s habeas corpus claim against the Ministry of the Interior, the Peruvian National Police (PNP), the PNP’s Department of State Security of Cusco, and the Cusco Regional Headquarters of the Superintendent of National Migration. The amicus curiae brief elaborates on the instruments of international law and policy that are relevant to the human rights aspects of Moore’s claim. It begins with a review of the official documents pertaining to the actions of the Defendants to apprehend Moore and subsequently prohibit her from re-entering Peru. On the basis of the information reviewed, we conclude that the actions and decisions of the Defendants violate the rights to free expression (Article 13), free association (Article 16) and free mobility (Article 22) as protected by the American Convention on Human Rights. Additionally, we note that the Defendants’ rationale for the ban on Moore in the circumstances of this case has the potential to adversely affect the human rights of anyone who visits Peru on a tourist visa and shares information or expresses views that are critical of the PNP or foreign mining companies. This highlights the international importance of this case.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it