Credible Commitment or Sham Devotion to the International Criminal Court: Whither Nigeria, Kenya and Uganda?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There is a pattern of inconsistent behaviour among some African states towards the International Criminal Court (ICC) showing credible commitment and sham devotion. This study poses a question: what will be of the status of Nigeria, Kenya and Uganda (the Triad) vis-à-vis the ICC by the end of 2023, considering the pattern of behaviour of these states so far, evidence from data and the spate of domestication and exit procedures in homogeneous African states in contemporary times? The objectives of the study are to predict the status of the Triad by 2023 and reflect on the implication of the predictions for the on-going viability, sustainability and credibility challenges facing the ICC in Africa. The study finds that: the pattern of Nigeria’s behaviour shows sham devotion and predicts that she will not domesticate the Rome Statute come 2023; the pattern of Kenya’s behaviour straddles credible commitment and sham devotion and she may maintain her membership of the ICC by 2023; the pattern of Uganda’s behaviour shows fairly credible commitment mixed with sham devotion and she will maintain her membership of the Statute come 2023. These predictions have implications on the ongoing viability, sustainability and credibility challenges facing the ICC in Africa.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".