Plaider les changements climatiques : l’activisme environnemental face à la justice canadienne
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les dernieres annees ont vu naitre une popularisation des methodes d’activisme environnemental basees sur la desobeissance civile, avec l’emergence de mouvements comme Extinction Rebellion. Certains auteurs soutiennent que la desobeissance civile est un moyen utile de provoquer des changements sociaux justifies. Or, cet article fait la demonstration que les tribunaux considerent le recours a la desobeissance civile en matiere environnementale comme etant illegitime, illegal et punissable. La premiere partie de cet article contextualise les approches theoriques des tribunaux en les comparant aux principales controverses soulevees dans la litterature, soit son caractere indirect, son rapport a la democratie ainsi qu’a la primaute du droit. La deuxieme partie traite des reponses des tribunaux aux differentes defenses invoquees par les activistes environnementaux, soit la defense de necessite et les contestations constitutionnelles relatives a la liberte d’expression et au droit a la vie, a la liberte et a la securite. La troisieme partie examine les principes de penologie applicables aux cas de desobeissance civile en matiere environnementale. Finalement, l’auteur invite a remettre en question le traitement judiciaire de la desobeissance civile, de maniere a tenir compte a la fois de la nature du droit criminel et des defis que pose la crise climatique.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".