L’Accès À La Justice Des Enfants Et Leur Droit De Participation Devant Les Tribunaux: Quelques Réflexion (Access to Justice for Children and Their Right to Participate in Court: Few Thoughts)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French Abstract: Cet article traite de la participation des enfants devant les tribunaux en tant qu’aspect fondamental de leur acces a la justice. En effet, la minorite de l’enfant est un obstacle a sa participation a la justice et elle se manifeste de differentes manieres, qu’on se trouve en protection de la jeunesse ou en droit de la famille, par exemple. De plus, on note que les lois et les pratiques sont inegales a travers le Canada. Cette differenciation selon la province ou le territoire et selon le domaine du droit contraste avec l’approche du droit international, qui prone des droits elargis de participation, quel que soit le domaine. En effet, la Convention sur les droits de l’enfant prevoit que l’enfant doit pouvoir se faire entendre dans toutes les procedures qui l’interessent. Ainsi, nous examinons les differentes manieres pour l’enfant de se faire entendre dans des procedures au Quebec, en nous concentrant sur les procedures judiciaires en matiere de protection de la jeunesse et en matiere familiale. Alors que plusieurs dispositions sont prevues dans la loi, celles-ci ne sont pas precises et laissent la place a une pratique criblee de contradictions. En l’absence de modifications legislatives, nous suggerons donc l’adoption de directives pour les professionnels, lesquelles seraient inspirees des travaux faits a l’echelle internationale, ainsi que de certaines pratiques presentes dans d’autres provinces canadiennes.English Abstract: This article examines children’s participation before the courts as a fundamental aspect of their access to justice. Children’s legal minority is an obstacle to their participation in justice and it manifests itself differently in child welfare compared law to family law, for example. Moreover, laws and practices vary across Canada. This different treatment according to jurisdiction and area of law contrasts with international law, which is used to advocate for wide participation rights for children whichever the field. According to the Convention on the Rights of the Child, children should be able to express themselves on all matters that concern them. Based on this, the paper will examine the different ways in which children can be heard in different procedures in Quebec, with a focus on judicial procedures in the areas of child protection and family law. While many provisions are included in the law, these are not precise enough and give way to many contradictions in practice. In the absence of legislative changes, this paper suggests the adoption of guidelines for professionals, which would be inspired by work done at the international level, as well as some practices in other Canadian provinces.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".