Towards a paradigm shift to an inclusionary immigration application model of the Canadian Charter the International Covenant of Civil Political Rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper provides a legislative account of Canada's 'immigration health policy' and argues that it continues to constitute a legalized form of discrimination that is anathema to Canadian core constitutional values and international human rights. It further argues in favour of a paradigm shift from an exclusionary Charter application model to an inclusionary application model by using section 15 (1) of the Charter. The role of the International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights is also examined in support of the proposed inclusionary paradigm shift. The principles of equality and non-discrimination espoused in Article 26 of the Covenant are analyzed and domestic case law that presumes the application of international customary and conventional law is also used in the analysis. Lastly, the Supreme Court decision in Hilewitz is used as a case study. The analysis of this decision illustrates the path dependency on earlier immigration policies.
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 | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| 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".