Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In a country where implementing children's rights in general remains a major challenge, the idea of according rights to children in conflict with the law can be a daunting task. With too many other children's problems to deal with such as the millions of street children and child laborers, female circumcision, and sexual violence against female children, the needs and rights of juvenile offenders could easily be relegated to the bottom of the government's priorities for children. Nonetheless, by virtue of ratifying the UNCRC in 1990, Ghana has made a commitment to address the needs and respect the rights of children in Ghana including its juvenile offenders. Thirteen years after ratifying the CRC, the Ghanaian Parliament passed the Juvenile Justice Act 2003 (Act 653). What rights does the Act accord children in conflict with the law? Do the policies and practices of the new juvenile justice system measure up to the standards of the Convention? These are the key questions addressed in this paper. The paper concludes that vis a vis the CRC, the new Juvenile Justice Act looks good on paper but argues that there is a colossal gap between policy and practice. The paper ends with suggestions on how to effectively protect the rights of children in conflict with the law.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".