Critical approach to Pakistan’s counter-terrorism legislative framework
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the late 1970s, Pakistan has been struggling against terrorist violence.In the pursuit of security against this violence various governments have implemented numerous counterterrorism legislative measures, but terrorism remains a major issue for Pakistan today.Its counterterrorism measures have not been able to effectively and sustainably break free from terrorist violence.This thesis will emplo y the framework of Critical Terrorism Studies (CTS) to explore the reasons for the ineffectiveness of Pakistan's legislative countering terrorism measures.CTS proposes that security should be interpreted as human security and not national security and that violence should be understood to include both direct and indirect or structural violence.In doing so, it becomes clear to see how contemporary counterterrorism measures fail to provide security because they tend to circumvent procedural safeguards which then in fact lead to more insecurity and violence.Such strategies remain ineffective in the long-term as they add onto the existing layers of violence.In this thesis, I will demonstrate that Pakistan's current counterterrorism laws are state-centric and overwhelmingly support violent strategies.This approach has helped the political and military elites to retain their power via political suppression.But it has led to implementing counterterrorism security measures that fail to address the underlying causes conducive to terrorism and instead contribute to inequalities and violence.This is why this thesis concludes that Pakistan should reject its violent counterterrorism approach for one that is committed to achieving emancipation from all types of violence (terrorist and counterterrorist), through means that are also non-violent, and are based on compassion, emancipation and empathy.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it