In Ghana, persons below 18 years of age are presumed to be children and vulnerable, and are expected to enjoy special protection and care against all hazards, even if they go against the law. This agrees with Ghana’s legal provision and other international legal documents. This study examined the knowledge of the police and their relationship with children in conflict with the law in Ghana using the Northern Region as a case study. Primary data were generated through interviews and questionnaire administration from a combined 219 participants who were purposely and systematically selected in a convergent mixed-methods design. The study found good knowledge of the police as to who a child in conflict with the law was (76%), yet only 40% rightly knew the criminal capacity of a child. The study revealed that the rights of children in conflict with the law, such as non-torture, access to legal assistance and right to safe custody, were flouted.

The meeting between the imperatives of criminal procedure, as legal instruments of the State, and human rights generates a confrontation at one time or another. Procedural formalities tend to protect society from the scourge of crime, while human rights imply respect for the fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual. However, implementing procedural formalities inevitably prevents the exercise of certain human rights. This article addresses this clash within the context of legal developments in Morocco since the promulgation of the 2011 Constitution. It highlights the extensive transformations in Morocco since 2011, the main objective of which was strengthening human rights and consolidating the rule of law. The most remarkable transformation undoubtedly remains the independence of the judiciary and the complete emancipation of the Public Prosecutor’s Office from the Minister of Justice’s power.

Radicalization in prison is a well-developed field of research that, particularly in the aftermath of 11 September 2001, has involved academics and practitioners in the attempt to highlight possible push and pull factors and dynamics, as well as useful strategies for preventing and countering extremism inside the facilities. Like every subject of great interest, it has given rise to numerous theories about the possible approaches to radical violence, some even at odds with each other. However, there is almost unanimous agreement that isolation from external society and the inadequate management of the right to profess one’s religious faith within prisons may be elements that increase the risk of intramural radicalization. In Italy, the COVID-19 pandemic interfered heavily not only in the lives of people belonging to free society but also – and perhaps even more – in the lives of prisoners, resulting in the total isolation of prison facilities from the outside community. The dramatic efforts to protect public health have effectively eclipsed every other right, including – for prisoners – practising one’s faith with the guidance of authorized religious leaders. The present article explores how and why these anti-virus changes in the management of the Italian penitentiary could have influenced the risk of intramural radicalization.

In February 2020, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a decision—Nevsun Resources Ltd. v. Araya, 2020 SCC 5—that can properly be described as revolutionary. In Nevsun, the court found that a Canadian corporation operating in a host state, Eretria, could be liable under Canadian domestic law for human rights abuses committed in Eritrea under customary international law, as incorporated into Canadian domestic law. The decision merits special attention because it is likely to fundamentally change the relationship between foreign investors, host states and the residents of host states adversely affected by investors’ unlawful conduct which amount to modern slavery.

The Monsanto International Tribunal, a creation of civil society, sat at The Hague in October 2016. In its “Advisory Opinion” of 18 April 2017, this popular tribunal assessed Monsanto’s conduct under international law with regard to the right to a healthy environment, the right to food, the right to health, scientific freedom, as well as war crimes and ecocide. This article analyzes that opinion and situates it in its international legal context. Given that Monsanto did not participate in the proceedings, the question of a fair trial — which can have a decisive impact on the content of the opinion — is the first issue examined. In regard to the opinion itself, the findings are measured: the Tribunal concluded that Monsanto clearly violated human rights, but not international criminal law under existing legal standards. Given that, the Tribunal suggested two measures to redress the imbalance of the international legal order: on the one hand, to establish a hierarchy in favour of human rights and, on the other hand, to make companies direct bearers of international obligations deriving from these rights.

This article analyzes women’s contemporary use of rights to mobilize and pursue claims for gender equality and gender justice in the United Kingdom. Empirically, the paper explores the growth of rights discourse and activity against the backdrop of a stronger constitutionalization of women’s rights at national, European, and international levels. It does this through an exploration of individual and collective lobbying and litigation strategies in relation to violence against women. The paper first examines this in the context of the right to bodily integrity through examples of the ways in which sexual violence and domestic abuse are addressed within the criminal justice system. The paper then addresses the right to be free from violence for women seeking refuge and asylum. The research reveals the need for varied strategies that target all aspects of the legal and political systems in order to ameliorate the protection and implementation of women’s rights.