A case study of judicial resistance in northern Syria after the March revolution of 2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Judges and prosecutors challenged oppressive laws introduced by the regime of Bashar al-Asad to curb the popular uprising of March 2011 in Syria. When some members of the judiciary became targets of the regime’s security forces, they resigned from office and formed independent councils to administer justice in regions no longer under state control. This article focuses on the first independent council in northern Syria: the Free Syrian Judicial Council (FSJC). Unlike the majority of non-state courts and councils established by groups of armed resistance in Syria, the FSJC does not belong to the category of “insurgent/rebel justice”. Rather, members of the FSJC were engaged in a form of resistance called “judicial resistance”: the capacity of judicial officers to challenge oppressive laws in their decision-making. The article argues that even after they left office, judges and prosecutors of the FSJC were still engaged in judicial resistance: they did their best to uphold the rule of law and provide services to the population despite the breakdown of public order and the fragmentation of the non-state judicial system engendered by the armed conflict.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| 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".