Legislative processes, nonstate actors, and political repression: the case of human rights NGOs in Israel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Previous research on legislation that targets nongovernmental organizations working on human rights issues (HR NGOs) has mostly focused on state actors in authoritarian regimes. In this study, we theorize the role of nonstate actors in political repression in a relatively more democratic setting, that of Israel. We conducted a systematic content analysis of thousands of legal documents, parliamentary archives, and media reports, complementing these with ethnographic work in several NGOs and in-depth interviews with NGO staffers. In contrast with theoretical views that see legislative processes as merely window dressing, we found that the Israeli legislative process has had a profound impact on Israeli HR NGOs, entailing a significant loss of public and political support, legitimacy, and scarce resources. We argue that scholars of political repression must pay greater attention to the crucial role played by nonstate actors in advancing and enforcing repressive legislation and to the entire legislative process—rather than only its formal legal results.
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 | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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".