MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7104257088 · doi:10.71781/2084

L'exclusion du bénéfice du statut de réfugié pour crimes contre l'humanité à l'épreuve du droit international et de la Charte canadienne des droits et libertés

2010· dissertation· fr· W7104257088 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2010
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration and Exile Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternational lawPersecutionCharterCustomary international lawRefugeeContext (archaeology)Human rightsState (computer science)United Nations Charter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The protection provided by the Geneva Convention in favor of persons fleeing persecution, the product of classic international law, is international. But it is not effective unless the Nation State integrates it into its domestic legislation and applies it through its immigration policies.We intend to show in this research how, confronted by contemporary challenges linked to the struggle against migratory flows, terrorism and international criminality, Nation States shield themselves behind their sovereign prerogatives in order to free themselves from their international obligations contracted under the terms of the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees with a plethora of judicial stratagems. They have armed themselves with legislation, policies, practices, procedures and mechanisms designed to limit the access of victims of persecution to international protection. We wish to show in this context of “security above all”, the Exclusion Clause has been diverted from its primary function to become a supplementary avenue to deny protection and a tool among others used by States to respond to security, penal or migratory objectives. The Canadian system for the determination of refugee status as well as the practices and procedures provided by the Canadian state do not escape from this perversion of the Convention and do not respect the norms of international law in this regard. Nevertheless, even if the Canadian system is lacking in safeguards on the procedural level with regards to international law as well as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian decisions (judge) has shown a judicious understanding of international law regarding crimes against humanity with regards to the categorization of acts that may result in exclusion or in individual penal responsibility. But the deportation of refused asylum-seekers, following a decision excluding international protection, towards places presenting risks for their lives or liberty requires a holistic and evolutionary approach to Article 1 F (a) of the Convention which would permit the integration of new developments in international law since 1951 and the exploration of alternative ways of protection with respect to refused refugee claimants. It is only on this basis that Article 1 F (a) will cease to be “a supplementary avenue to denying protection”.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.319 · 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