Localization from a Postcolonial Perspective: African States’ Experiences with the International Criminal Justice Norm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper develops a postcolonial perspective on norm localization to argue that the contradictory conduct of African states in the international normative order emanates from a postcolonial structural condition with external and internal dimensions. The external dimension, linked to deep-rooted distrust within the society of states from historical imperialism to contemporary neocolonial relations, stems from the fact that African nations have been integrated into unequal power relations, which in turn shape their ideas and concerns about the legitimacy of the normative order itself. The internal dimension, which threatens domestic political stability, arises from the colonial construction of African states as inherently prone to violence orchestrated by nonstate actors from within and powerful actors from outside. In this structure, strategic ambivalent conduct involves the adoption of two sets of contradictory measures that together challenge the liberal notion of a predetermined linear and progressive normative development. While measures at the international level invoke ideas that normative progress is supposed to supersede, measures at the regional level appeal to African traditions and political/economic realities to reconstitute or create a new norm. Localization of the international criminal justice norm, which seeks to hold individuals criminally accountable for grave violation of international humanitarian and human rights laws, is presented as a case study.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| 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".