MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193159687 · doi:10.23920/pjil.v4i2.413

IMPACT OF PHILIPPINES’ WITHDRAWAL FROM INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT ON CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY INVESTIGATION IN PHILIPPINES

2021· article· en· W3193159687 on OpenAlexaff
Aisyah Jasmine Yogaswara

Bibliographic record

VenuePadjadjaran Journal of International Law · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrimes against humanityStatuteLawPolitical scienceWar crimeJurisdictionCriminologyHumanityCriminal courtStatute of limitationsRome Statute of the International Criminal CourtInternational lawSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rodrigo Roa Duterte is the incumbent president of the Philippines who was inaugurated on June 30th 2016 and initiated the War on Drugs Operation to eradicate drug abuse in the Philippines one day after his inauguration. The operation gave authorization to the members of Philippines National Police to ‘neutralize’ or kill suspects of illegal drugs dealers and users. The operation also related to other crime such as rape, imprisonment, and torture. The crimes are committed as part of a widespread and systematic attack directed against the civilian population as therefore it can be qualified as crimes against humanity. Philippines’ status as a state party to Rome Statute gives ICC the chance to prosecute Philippines’ nationals if they committed crimes against humanity. However, after the ICC Prosecutor initiated preliminary examination on the related case, Philippines deposited its instrument of withdrawal from the Rome Statute. The purpose of this research is to find out the legal effect of Philippines withdrawal toward ICC’s process of preliminary examination, investigation, and trial, and whether ICC have any jurisdiction over crimes against humanity that is committed after Philippines’ withdrawal becomes effective. Keywords: Crimes Against Humanity, International Criminal Court, Rome Statute Abstrak Rodrigo Roa Duterte menjabat menjadi Presiden Filipina pada tanggal 30 Juni 2016 dan memulai operasi pemberantasan narkotika yang disebut War on Drugs Operation sehari setelahnya. Operasi tersebut memberikan izin bagi Polisi Nasional Filipina untuk melakukan penembakan di tempat atas tersangka pengguna dan pengedar narkotika. Selain itu, terdapat kejahatan lain terkait operasi tersebut di antaranya pemerkosaan, penyiksaan dan penahanan tanpa proses hukum. Kejahatan-kejahatan tersebut dilakukan secara meluas, sistematis dan ditujukan pada populasi sipil yang menjadikannya dapat dikualifikasikan sebagai kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan. Status Filipina sebagai negara pihak dalam Statuta Roma menjadikan ICC memiliki kewenangan untuk mengadili warga negara Filipina yang melakukan kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan. Namun, setelah Jaksa Penuntut ICC memulai pemeriksaan pendahuluan atas War on Drugs Operation, Filipina melakukan penarikan diri dari Statuta Roma. Tujuan dari penulisan tugas akhir ini adalah untuk mengetahui bagaimana pengaruh penarikan diri Filipina dari Statuta Roma terhadap pemeriksaan pendahuluan yang sedang dilakukan dan apakah ICC memiliki yurisdiksi atas kejahatan terhadap kemanusiaan yang masih terjadi di Filipina pasca penarikan dirinya berlaku efektif. Kata kunci: Kejahatan Terhadap Kemanusiaan, Mahkamah Pidana Internasional, Statuta Roma

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.098
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePadjadjaran Journal of International LawSame topicInternational Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207