MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2941519522 · doi:10.13140/rg.2.2.17532.90243

Developing a legal framework for state compensation of crime victims in Nigeria

2017· dissertation· en· W2941519522 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Pius Imiera

Bibliographic record

VenueUpSpace Institutional Repository (University of Pretoria) · 2017
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompensation (psychology)State (computer science)CriminologyPolitical scienceComputer securityLawBusinessComputer scienceSociologyPsychologySocial psychologyAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1999 Constitution of Nigeria provides expressly for the safety and protection of the rights of citizens in general terms, including other provisions which guarantee the safety of the Nigerian people; however, the Constitution places priority on the rights of criminals over and above the rights and interests of crime victims. This position and situation has engendered public dissatisfaction with the Nigerian criminal justice systems in general and the Constitution in particular. \nThis study has analysed the means and mechanisms available in the Nigerian legal system for crime victims’ compensation and restitution for criminal acts committed against them, and it has found that those means are different to what are obtained in other jurisdictions. The study further found that state-funded compensation for crime victims is practiced to various degrees in places like New Zealand, Great Britain, the United States of America, Canada, Australia, Germany, Finland, Colombia and the Philippines to mention but a few. \nThe study discovered that, as it stands presently in Nigeria, there are no public compensation schemes for crime victims and that the compensation mechanisms that exist in the country which the courts award are grossly inadequate. The study also found that the Nigerian government does not see the need to establish state-funded compensation schemes for crime victims on the premise that crime victims should exercise their rights to claim compensation from the criminal offenders in delictual or tort claims. This study, therefore, argues that the extant legal frameworks in Nigeria are manifestly inadequate to provide for the needs of crime victims effectively in the aftermath of victimization and recommends the development of a system for state-funded compensation for crime victims in Nigeria building on comparative best practices and international guidelines such as the UN Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse of Power and the Commonwealth Guidelines for the Treatment of Victims of Crime.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.087

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.010
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0060.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUpSpace Institutional Repository (University of Pretoria)Same topicTerrorism, Counterterrorism, and Political ViolenceFrench-language works237,207