La Belgique face à son passé colonial : l’affaire des enfants métis et la qualification de crime contre l’humanité
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le 8 décembre 2021, le tribunal de première instance de Bruxelles se prononçait dans le cadre de l’affaire des « enfants métis » et arguait que « la politique de placement [de ceux-ci] dans des institutions religieuses pour des motifs raciaux n’était pas, entre 1948 et 1961, considérée par la Communauté des États comme un crime contre l’humanité et incriminée comme telle ». Néanmoins, il se trouve que les faits peuvent être qualifiés de crime contre l’humanité au sens de l’article 6(c) du Statut du TMI de Nuremberg (qui lie juridiquement la Belgique) et ce, notamment sous le crime de persécution. Ce point de vue, étayé par les travaux de la Commissions du droit international en la matière, révèle finalement l’hypocrisie et la frilosité dont fait preuve le système judiciaire belge quant aux crimes coloniaux en comparaison de la détermination de celui-ci à punir les criminels nazis à l’image d’Otto Siegburg.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".