Seeking justice in Guatemala: dignifying the 'disappeared' in a context of impunity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following Guatemala’s internal armed conflict (1960-1996), the Commission for Historical Clarification (CEH 1999) estimated that 200,000 people were killed and 40,000 ‘disappeared.’ The ‘disappearances’ left relatives in permanent uncertainty and ambiguous loss, while perpetrators maintained positions of power, protected by impunity and sometimes political immunity. I examined perceptions of justice related to the ‘disappeared’ in a context of long-term impunity, as experienced by the surviving family members and staff members of forensic and archival organizations. This research was inspired by postcolonial and feminist critical geographic methodologies, emphasizing and valuing the voices of the interviewees and their experiences. I conducted fieldwork in Guatemala from May to July 2012. Based on my analysis of 17 in-depth interviews, I argued that the successful future of the country and its people relies on the continued search for justice, being: truth-seeking in its various forms; positive political change; acknowledgement of grave crimes, and legal accountability.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".