Deployment and Distress:Legal issues confronting Danish navy vessels in connection with search and rescue of migrant boats in the Mediterranean
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performance of maritime search and rescue (SAR) is increasingly subject to political and legal discussions. The increase in irregular boat migration from the late 1970s onwards has significantly changed the context in which the SAR regime operates. The ensuing conflation of search and rescue with migration control provides a fundamental chal- lenge to the inherently functional and pragmatic approach foreseen in the SAR regime. The issue has become particularly acute in a European context, and in the Mediterranean region in particular, which has seen repeated instances of political impasses, port closures, reported non-per- formance or active pushbacks. The implications of political disputes and breakdowns in international cooperation are significant – most directly for migrants and others in distress at sea, but also for individual ship- masters and Danish shipping companies operating routes in areas where SAR responsibilities remain subject to dispute. But SAR also raises com- plex legal questions and creates political dilemmas for naval authorities and States which, like Denmark, actively participate in joint maritime operations as part, for example, of EU or NATO cooperation.<br/>The present report offers an integrated analysis of the relevant inter- national legal obligations which implicate Danish naval forces in SAR operations in the Mediterranean. Beyond the political context, it argues that the current situation is a result of gaps and shortcomings in the ex- isting international legal SAR framework, attenuated by the growing politicisation of the issue of boat migrants in the Mediterranean. It sec- ondly points to the fact that SAR operations are governed by multiple different international legal regimes, the interaction between which is far from always smooth and often subject to significantly differing inter- pretations among both EU and Mediterranean States. It thirdly suggests that growing international cooperation and more complex structures for transnational law enforcement are raising new and complex question
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 | 0.005 | 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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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".