Peran dan Tantangan International Criminal Court (ICC) dalam Percobaan Perdamaian Konflik Israel-Palestina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The International Criminal Court (ICC) plays a strategic role in upholding international law, particularly in addressing grave crimes such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. In the context of the Israel-Palestine conflict, the ICC serves as an independent body offering hope to Palestine in seeking accountability for alleged human rights violations committed by Israel. This study analyzes the ICC’s role in the conflict and identifies the challenges it faces. The findings reveal that the ICC’s jurisdiction, as stipulated by the Rome Statute, encounters significant obstacles, particularly as Israel has not ratified the Rome Statute and firmly rejects the ICC’s authority. Conversely, Palestine, a member of the ICC since April 2015, has sought to utilize international legal mechanisms to pursue justice. The study concludes that while the ICC has considerable potential to enforce justice, legal and political challenges such as the refusal of cooperation by accused parties and the complex geopolitical dynamics limit its effectiveness. This research provides critical insights into the ICC’s role and challenges in administering justice in conflict zones, as well as its contribution to peace efforts in Israel and Palestine.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.001 |
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.
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".