Civil Society Activism and the Ghanaian National Reconciliation Commission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
during the military regimes, grave human rights abuses were believed to have been committed, including rape, confiscation of properties, unlawful detentions, torture and widespread disappearances.4 These violations have not only left a mark of hatred in the relationship between victims and perpetrators of the crimes but have also created huge deficits in the human rights records of the country.The decision of the Provisional National Defence Council (PNDC) regime to return the country to constitutional rule in 1992 was influenced to some extent by the dedication and resourcefulness of civil society organizations.5 Indeed, the role of civil society organizations in policy making in Ghana has developed gradually from insignificant involvement to extensive engagement over the last two decades.6 This pattern of development is similar to what happened at the international level where Moore and Pubantz 7 have argued that it was not till the 1980s that the United Nations saw an explosion in the quantity and quality of NGOs.8 In this spirit, the Ghana Bar Association, religious bodies and other civil society organizations have all worked relentlessly in ensuring that Ghana did not only return to democratic rule but have also initiated measures aimed at reconciling the nation through the granting of military rule to the democratic government of Flight Lieutenant Jerry John Rawlings signifying the beginning of the Fourth Republic.4 Robert Ameh, "Uncovering Truth: Ghana's National Reconciliation Commission Excavation of Past Human Rights Abuses," Contemporary Justice Review 9.4 (2006): 345-368.5 Emmanuel Gyimah-Boadi, "Civil Society in Africa: the Good, the Bad, the Ugly," CIVNET, 1.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 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".