MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294707417 · doi:10.31703/glsr.2022(vii-i).09

Implementation and Incorporation of International Treaties into Domestic Law of Pakistan: A Case Study of International Space Law Treaties

2022· article· en· W4294707417 on OpenAlexaff
Shakeel Ahmad, Fazal Rabbi, Ahsan Riaz

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Legal Studies Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicSpace exploration and regulation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRatificationLawMunicipal lawTreatyInternational lawPolitical scienceLegislationCommon lawVienna Convention on the Law of TreatiesCustomary international lawComparative lawPublic international lawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Countries routinely sign bilateral and multilateral treaties that oblige them to abide by their terms.Ratification of the international treaty requires that common law countries should incorporate the treaty into domestic law. English common law serves as the foundation for Pakistan's legislation governing the reception of international treaties. The rationale of the common law system typically does not directly incorporate international treaties but requires separate enabling legislation so that there should be no conflicting legal provisions between national law and the provisions of the relevant treaty. The rationale behind incorporation varies as per constitutional requirements and the interest of the state. This paper provides the general explanations in the context of the common law legal system specific to Pakistan; as a case study, international space law treaties have been discussed to provide the answer to why incorporation and implementation is an important steps.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.356 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Legal Studies ReviewSame topicSpace exploration and regulationFrench-language works237,207