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.

The criminological dimension of crime generally does not arouse great enthusiasm from researchers in Arab countries, unlike Anglo-Saxon- or French-speaking countries. Admittedly, Western criminology is more advanced, but it is more interested in common crimes than in mass crimes such as crimes against humanity, genocide, human trafficking or terrorism. However, the rare existing studies reveal the emergence of a criminology of massive human rights violations and expose some particularities of this criminal phenomenon. These include the often transnational nature of the crimes, the geographical, socio-economic and political disparity of criminals, the high number of victims, and more. The relationship between criminal law, criminology and human rights should be examined to determine the complementarity of the law and the empirical criminal sciences in crime prevention.

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.

Much has been written about China's active engagement and progressive approach to the “responsibility to protect,” a norm that reframes state sovereignty not as a right but as a responsibility. China's response to the “Report of the UN Commission of Inquiry on human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK),” which invokes the norm, however, challenges existing literature. China flatly refuses to uphold the responsibility to protect in the case of the DPRK, despite using previously supported standards to invoke the norm elsewhere and the report's dozens of consensual recommendations. This article is the first to systematically investigate how China has responded to the report. It shows that China's responses are shaped by its exceptionalism and concerns that the responsibility to protect could lead to regime change. I conclude with implications for the broader question of China's engagement with international norms in its near abroad. In my discussion, I draw on interviews with Korean and Chinese foreign policy elites, UN and US officials and DPRK human rights advocates, as well as primary and secondary documents.

In this article, we seek to explain the persistence of the Communist Party's campaign to suppress the Falun Gong religious movement. We argue that the unrecoverable investment of more than a decade's worth of suppression work, compounded by the ineffectiveness of these efforts (as evinced in official documents and by the continuation of resistance activities), limits the state's ability to halt its campaign against Falun Gong. Our findings shed light on some of the Chinese state's current strategies for the management and control of domestic opposition groups, and challenge the view of the Party as adaptable and highly capable of reform from within.