MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W590513691

The crown's powers of command-in chief: interpreting section 15 of Canada's constitution act, 1867

2013· article· en· W590513691 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Philippe Lagassé

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d'études constitutionnelles · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommonwealth, Australian Politics and Federalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatuteConstitutionParliamentLawPolitical scienceSection (typography)Inherent powersExecutive powerEnumerated powersSeparation of powersConstitutional lawPower (physics)PoliticsPhysicsBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies of Canadian constitutional law have tended to overlook section 15 of the Constitution Act, 1867, which vests the command-in-chief of Canada’s armed forces in the Crown as the executive power. This article argues that, despite being largely ignored, section 15 is a significant constitutional provision, one that grants the executive constitutionally protected powers over the armed forces. Specifically, the article demonstrates that this section provides the executive with an entrenched constitutional authority to raise, govern, command, and use Canada’s armed forces. While parliamentary statutes could limit how this authority is exercised, these powers of the executive cannot be abolished or displaced by an Act of Parliament owing to their being sourced in section 15. The article begins with an overview of the nature of executive power in Canada, in order to establish that the Crown is vested with constitutionally entrenched authorities that cannot be abolished or entirely displaced by statute. Next, the article argues that section 15 of the Constitution Act, 1867 provides the executive with a constitutionally protected authority to raise, govern, command, and use Canada’s armed forces. Drawing on comparisons with Australian and New Zealand laws, the article then demonstrates that these section 15 powers are assumed to exist by Canada’s National Defence Act, the parliamentary statute that is often presented as the source of the executive’s authority over the armed forces.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.958

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0160.026
Scholarly communication0.0140.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d'études constitutionnellesSame topicCommonwealth, Australian Politics and FederalismFrench-language works237,207