Die Durchbrechung der Staatenimmunität im Falle des staatlich geförderten Terrorismus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Der Grundsatz der Staatenimmunität ist ein politisch sensibles und umstrittenes Thema im Völkerrecht. Befeuert werden das Ringen um Reichweite und Entwicklung des Grundsatzes der Staatenimmunität durch die USA und Kanada, die mit dem Erlass einer Terrorismusausnahme zur Staatenimmunität einen neuen Weg beschreiten. Zuletzt erweiterten die USA ihre Gesetzgebung um den »Justice Against State Sponsors of Terrorism Act«, der in der Staatenwelt auf erhebliche Kritik stieß. Die Arbeit nimmt dies zum Anlass und untersucht Rechtsprechungs- und Gesetzgebungspraxis beider Staaten. Die Autorin legt dar, dass es sich bei der Terrorismusausnahme zur Staatenimmunität um eine Ausnahme »sui generis« handelt, die als effektives Instrument zur Terrorismusbekämpfung dienen kann. Die Durchbrechung der Staatenimmunität in Fällen des staatlich geförderten Terrorismus stellt gegenwärtig einen Bruch des Völkerrechts dar, der jedoch als Gegenmaßnahme nach den Grundsätzen der Staatenverantwortlichkeit gerechtfertigt sein kann. »The Terrorism Exception to State Immunity« The U.S. and Canada are breaking new ground by enacting a terrorism exception to sovereign immunity. Most recently, the U.S. expanded its legislation to include the »Justice Against State Sponsors of Terrorism Act«, which met considerable criticism from various of states. The author takes this as an opportunity to examine judicial and legislative practices of both states, to assess the role of the terrorism exception as an instrument for combating terrorism and its compatibility with international law.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.073 | 0.020 |
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".