O papel da Suprema Corte Canadense em prol da defesa dos direitos da pessoa migrante: subvertendo o estado de exceção pelas vias do ativismo judicial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
O PAPEL DA SUPREMA CORTE CANADENSE EM PROL DA DEFESA DOS DIREITOS DA PESSOA MIGRANTE: SUBVERTENDO O ESTADO DE EXCECAO PELAS VIAS DO ATIVISMO JUDICIAL Resumo: Desde 2001, o Canada passou por diversos movimentos securitizadores da pauta migratoria e desde entao tem lancado mao de praticas arbitrarias no tratamento da migracao nao-autorizada, como a prisao por tempo indeterminado de imigrantes irregulares. Nesse sentido, esta pesquisa objetivou demonstrar, a partir da jurisdicao constitucional canadense, de que maneira o ativismo judicial pelos direitos humanos das pessoas migrantes no contexto dos Tribunais Constitucionais pode proporcionar a efetivacao de direitos em contextos de excecao. O metodo utilizado fora o descritivo-analitico, com o auxilio da pesquisa bibliografica e documental. A abordagem da pesquisa e essencialmente qualitativa e tambem exploratoria. As principais conclusoes desta investigacao foram que, nos casos aqui analisados, a Suprema Corte do Canada demonstrou seu compromisso com a (re)afirmacao dos ideais democraticos que incluem a protecao e salvaguarda dos direitos humanos, ao produzir entendimentos que desafiaram as normas postas e foram na contramao dos movimentos de securitizacao, criminalizacao e racializacao das pessoas migrantes no pais. Este artigo contribui para o avanco do entendimento acerca dos processos de criminalizacao da migracao irregular e como remedia-los por meio do ativismo judicial nas Cortes Constitucionais, a partir do exemplo canadense. Palavras-chaves : Direitos humanos. Pessoa migrante. Jurisdicao constitucional. Canada. Ativismo judicial. THE ROLE OF THE CANADIAN SUPREME COURT IN DEFENDING THE RIGHTS OF MIGRANT PERSONS: SUBVERTING THE STATE OF EXCEPTION BY THE ROUTES OF JUDICIAL ACTIVISM Abstract : Since 2001, Canada has undergone several securitization movements on the migratory agenda and since then it has resorted to arbitrary practices in the treatment of unauthorized migration, such as the indefinite imprisonment of irregular immigrants. In this sense, this research aimed to demonstrate, from the Canadian constitutional jurisdiction, how judicial activism for the human rights of migrant people in the context of Constitutional Courts can provide the enforcement of rights in contexts of exception. The method used was descriptive-analytical, with the aid of bibliographic and documentary research. The research approach is essentially qualitative and also exploratory. The main conclusions of this investigation were that, in the cases analyzed here, the Supreme Court of Canada demonstrated its commitment to the (re) affirmation of democratic ideals that include the protection and safeguarding of human rights, by producing understandings that defied the norms and stood up against the movements of securitization, criminalization and racialization of migrant people in the country. This article contributes to the advancement of the understanding about the criminalization processes of irregular migration and how to remedy them through judicial activism in the Constitutional Courts, based on the Canadian example. Keywords : Human rights. Migrant person. Constitutional jurisdiction. Canada. Judicial activism. Data da submissao: 20/11/2020 Data da aprovacao: 18/12/2020
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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".