MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4361192518 · doi:10.32920/22229461.v1

Emerging Duties: Protecting Canadians’ Human Rights Abroad

2023· preprint· en· W4361192518 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer Orange

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Aviation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComityPolitical scienceCharterHuman rightsLawInternational lawState (computer science)Jurisdiction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada (Prime Minister) v. Khadr, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the principle of comity should be limited in situations where Canadian officials acting abroad have violated an international human right of a Canadian citizen. In such instances, the Charter applies. In this paper, the author argues that recent international law developments, including the Responsibility to Protect doctrine and its new conception of « sovereignty as responsibility », challenge the prerequisite of Canadian state involvement in the breach. The principle of comity should not be used as a barrier to remedial action for international human rights violations. Section 7 of the Charter should now be interpreted to include the right of Canadians to the protection of their government when their rights are being violated by a foreign state. This right must have internal limits; that is, there must be proportionality between the required governmental response and the harm caused to the Canadian abroad. Dans l’arrˆet Canada (Premier ministre) c. Khadr, la Cour suprˆeme du Canada a d´eclar´e que le principe de la courtoisie devrait ˆetre restreint dans les situations o`u des responsables canadiens en mission `a l’´etranger ont viol´e un droit fondamental de la personne reconnu en droit international d’un citoyen canadien. Dans de tels cas, la Charte s’applique. Dans cet article, l’auteure soutient que de r´ecents d´eveloppements en droit international, notamment le concept de la responsabilit´e de prot´eger et la nouvelle conception de la « souverainet´e en tant que responsabilit´e », remettent en question l’exigence d’une participation de l’Etat ´ canadien dans la violation. Le principe de la courtoisie ne devrait pas devenir un empˆechement aux mesures correctrices dans les cas de violation des droits internationaux de la personne. L’article 7 de la Charte devrait maintenant s’interpr´eter de fa¸con `a inclure le droit des Canadiens `a ˆetre prot´eg´es par leur gouvernement lorsque leurs droits sont viol´es par un Etat ´ ´ etranger. Ce droit devrait comprendre des limites internes, c’est-`a-dire qu’il devrait y avoir un lien de proportionnalit´e entre l’action gouvernementale requise et le pr´ejudice caus´e au Canadien situ´e `a l’´etranger

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0180.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.039
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternational Law and Aviation→French-language works237,207→