Universal Jurisdiction, Jus Cogens, and Suppression Conventions in the Aftermath of Lockerbie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Universal jurisdiction is a principle of international law that maintains the right to try an accused for serious crimes that are globally recognised. The offences are defined in international customary law and include the breach of the jus cogens norms. The liability for breach of the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation (‘Montreal Convention’) was invoked in the case of suspects from Libyan Arab Jamahiriya in the Lockerbie air disaster. The United Kingdom and the United States made a separate request to the UN Security Council to take certain provisional measures against Libya, calculated to coerce or compel it to surrender the accused individuals to any jurisdiction outside Libya. The judgment led to a miscarriage of justice as the accused were tried under Scottish law and the issue is whether a ‘third alternative’ could be added to the traditional aut dedere aut judicare principle – aut transferere. The argument here is that in order for the principle to be sustained there should be recognition of the principle of universal jurisdiction and the ambit of the Suppression Conventions should be extended so that a trial can be conducted in the domestic courts of a foreign defendant.
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".