Ezokola <i>v</i>. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treaties — Interpretation — United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 — Article 1F(a) — Refugee protection status — Whether exclusion from definition of refugee under Article 1F(a) on basis of complicity in international crimes International criminal law — International crimes — Crimes against humanity — Individual criminal liability for complicity — Complicity in international crimes committed by a government — Contribution-based test to complicity — Voluntary, significant and knowing contribution to international crimes committed by a government — Complicity by association or passive acquiescence Sources of international law — Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 1998 — Article 25(3)(d) on common purpose liability — Ad hoc tribunals’ jurisprudence on joint criminal enterprise — Whether these modes of commission of international crimes also capturing complicity by association, rank or passive acquiescence — Nexus requirement between individual’s conduct and group’s criminal activity Relationship of international law and municipal law — Approach taken by other State Parties to concept of complicity — Whether Canadian approach needing rearticulation — Interpretation of Article 1F(a) of United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, 1951 excluding complicity by association or passive acquiescence — The law of Canada
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.073 | 0.016 |
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".