For the last three decades, legal scholarship on the judicial review of legislation has dominated comparative constitutional studies. Moreover, one of the emerging interests in comparative constitutional law is pre-enactment (ex ante) control of constitutionality. Historically, legal thinking in the US has advanced judicial review, while British tradition has prioritized parliamentary sovereignty, in which parliament, not courts, is the ultimate decision maker related to constitutional disputes. The current scholarship, nevertheless, argues that a particular constitutional model has emerged in a number of Commonwealth countries in which courts and legislatures are not considered alternative to each other, contrary to the traditional paradigms that prioritize either courts or legislatures. One of the defining features of this model is the pre-enactment constitutional review of proposed legislation. In some of those countries, pre-enactment review of legislation is available only in the form of executive responsibility, while the legislature has a key role in the remaining countries, in addition to the commitment of the executive. This article investigates whether similar pre-enactment constitutional review mechanisms exist elsewhere. For this purpose, it will examine East Nordic constitutional practice and ask whether there is a particular type of pre-enactment constitutional review in Finland and Sweden. The function to review constitutionality of proposed legislation belongs to non-judicial mechanisms in both Finland and Sweden. However, pre-enactment constitutional review mechanisms in these two polities are hardly considered in comparative constitutional law. This article aims to fill this gap by drawing comparative scholars’ attention to the East Nordic constitutionalism. judicial review, comparative constitutional law, pre-enactment constitutional review, Nordic constitutionalism, Finland & Sweden
{"title":"East Nordic Model of Pre-Enactment Constitutional Review: Comparative Evidence from Finland and Sweden","authors":"Serkan Yolcu","doi":"10.54648/euro2020053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020053","url":null,"abstract":"For the last three decades, legal scholarship on the judicial review of legislation has dominated comparative constitutional studies. Moreover, one of the emerging interests in comparative constitutional law is pre-enactment (ex ante) control of constitutionality. Historically, legal thinking in the US has advanced judicial review, while British tradition has prioritized parliamentary sovereignty, in which parliament, not courts, is the ultimate decision maker related to constitutional disputes. The current scholarship, nevertheless, argues that a particular constitutional model has emerged in a number of Commonwealth countries in which courts and legislatures are not considered alternative to each other, contrary to the traditional paradigms that prioritize either courts or legislatures. One of the defining features of this model is the pre-enactment constitutional review of proposed legislation. In some of those countries, pre-enactment review of legislation is available only in the form of executive responsibility, while the legislature has a key role in the remaining countries, in addition to the commitment of the executive. This article investigates whether similar pre-enactment constitutional review mechanisms exist elsewhere. For this purpose, it will examine East Nordic constitutional practice and ask whether there is a particular type of pre-enactment constitutional review in Finland and Sweden. The function to review constitutionality of proposed legislation belongs to non-judicial mechanisms in both Finland and Sweden. However, pre-enactment constitutional review mechanisms in these two polities are hardly considered in comparative constitutional law. This article aims to fill this gap by drawing comparative scholars’ attention to the East Nordic constitutionalism.\u0000judicial review, comparative constitutional law, pre-enactment constitutional review, Nordic constitutionalism, Finland & Sweden","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49400113","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The interoperability initiative passed in May 2019 as Regulations (EU) 2019/817 and 818 seeks new strategies for identifying dangerous individuals who use false or multiple identities. The EU’s databases in the Area of Freedom Security and Justice (AFSJ) for policing and migration purposes will be interconnected. This constitutes a paradigm shift for purpose limitation as a core element of data protection. This article identifies regulatory patterns and shortcomings in the technical and legal data protection arrangements of the interoperability regulations. The legal framework for data protection in the EU has developed considerably with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 2016/679 and with Directive 2016/680 for policing and criminal justice. The European Data Protection Board, a multilevel accountability forum in which European and national data protection authorities cooperate has been established. From a trans-disciplinary legal, public administration, and public policy perspective, this article analyses the regulatory patterns and institutional settings established for the upcoming interoperability of databases for policing and migration. EU migration and policing databases, police information sharing, interoperability, data protection, privacy, accountability, eu-LISA, Europol, Schengen Information System, Visa Information System, EU external borders
{"title":"Interoperability Between EU Policing and Migration Databases: Risks for Privacy","authors":"H. Aden","doi":"10.54648/euro2020006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020006","url":null,"abstract":"The interoperability initiative passed in May 2019 as Regulations (EU) 2019/817 and 818 seeks new strategies for identifying dangerous individuals who use false or multiple identities. The EU’s databases in the Area of Freedom Security and Justice (AFSJ) for policing and migration purposes will be interconnected. This constitutes a paradigm shift for purpose limitation as a core element of data protection. This article identifies regulatory patterns and shortcomings in the technical and legal data protection arrangements of the interoperability regulations. The legal framework for data protection in the EU has developed considerably with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) 2016/679 and with Directive 2016/680 for policing and criminal justice. The European Data Protection Board, a multilevel accountability forum in which European and national data protection authorities cooperate has been established. From a trans-disciplinary legal, public administration, and public policy perspective, this article analyses the regulatory patterns and institutional settings established for the upcoming interoperability of databases for policing and migration.\u0000EU migration and policing databases, police information sharing, interoperability, data protection, privacy, accountability, eu-LISA, Europol, Schengen Information System, Visa Information System, EU external borders","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44578851","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Book Review: Administrative Regulation Beyond the Non-Delegation Doctrine: A Study on EU Agencies. by Marta Simonici, (Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2018)","authors":"","doi":"10.54648/euro2020012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020012","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42096963","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The aim of this article is to investigate whether the cooperation of Frontex with third countries in information sharing is in compliance with EU’s constitutional normative rules and values. Since more than a decade, border control and surveillance have been developed as policies instrumental to migration control. The shift towards risk management in many areas of public governance has implied that EU’s action at the external borders is built upon a combination of policies of securitization of migration and externalization of border management. Against this theoretical background, the article focuses on the external competences or powers of Frontex, mapping in particular practices of information sharing with third country authorities, which are functional to risk analysis, one of the core tasks of Frontex. It analyses working arrangements, intelligence sharing communities and cooperation taking place within the context of technical assistance. The article further discusses the legal challenges these types of cooperation brings to the EU, as a governance system based on the rule of law. These are indicated in transparency and accountability, respect for fundamental rights and privacy challenges. Frontex, external relations, information-sharing, cooperation with third countries, transparency and accountability, fundamental rights, data protection
{"title":"The Cooperation Between Frontex and Third Countries in Information Sharing: Practices, Law and Challenges in Externalizing Border Control Functions","authors":"L. Marin","doi":"10.54648/euro2020009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020009","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to investigate whether the cooperation of Frontex with third countries in information sharing is in compliance with EU’s constitutional normative rules and values.\u0000Since more than a decade, border control and surveillance have been developed as policies instrumental to migration control. The shift towards risk management in many areas of public governance has implied that EU’s action at the external borders is built upon a combination of policies of securitization of migration and externalization of border management.\u0000Against this theoretical background, the article focuses on the external competences or powers of Frontex, mapping in particular practices of information sharing with third country authorities, which are functional to risk analysis, one of the core tasks of Frontex. It analyses working arrangements, intelligence sharing communities and cooperation taking place within the context of technical assistance.\u0000The article further discusses the legal challenges these types of cooperation brings to the EU, as a governance system based on the rule of law. These are indicated in transparency and accountability, respect for fundamental rights and privacy challenges.\u0000Frontex, external relations, information-sharing, cooperation with third countries, transparency and accountability, fundamental rights, data protection","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47432004","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Information exchanges between authorities located at different levels of administration, and in different Member States, have always constituted a central feature of European Union governance. Nevertheless, the increasingly pervasive phenomenon of interoperable information-sharing, where information systems pertaining to different policy fields are joined up to facilitate exchanges of (personal) data, generates new structural challenges to the European Union from a political, legal, and indeed constitutional perspective. In this introduction, besides offering a brief overview of the contributions to the special issue, we argue that interoperability shifts the frontiers of EU governance in at least five distinct respects. It shifts existing boundaries in the divisions of power within the EU; in the reach of its data protection laws; in the tensions between the EU’s commitment to fundamental rights and the principle of mutual trust between the Member States; in the relations between EU, third state, and international authorities; and lastly, between the technicalities of information technologies and critical ethical and constitutional imperatives. interoperability, information-sharing, European administrative governance, data protection, accountability
{"title":"Interoperable Information Sharing and the Five Novel Frontiers of EU Governance: A Special Issue","authors":"D. Curtin, F. B. Bastos","doi":"10.54648/euro2020004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020004","url":null,"abstract":"Information exchanges between authorities located at different levels of administration, and in different Member States, have always constituted a central feature of European Union governance. Nevertheless, the increasingly pervasive phenomenon of interoperable information-sharing, where information systems pertaining to different policy fields are joined up to facilitate exchanges of (personal) data, generates new structural challenges to the European Union from a political, legal, and indeed constitutional perspective.\u0000In this introduction, besides offering a brief overview of the contributions to the special issue, we argue that interoperability shifts the frontiers of EU governance in at least five distinct respects. It shifts existing boundaries in the divisions of power within the EU; in the reach of its data protection laws; in the tensions between the EU’s commitment to fundamental rights and the principle of mutual trust between the Member States; in the relations between EU, third state, and international authorities; and lastly, between the technicalities of information technologies and critical ethical and constitutional imperatives.\u0000interoperability, information-sharing, European administrative governance, data protection, accountability","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48328884","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Data sharing and interoperability aspects of Europol’s information systems outside the EU are particularly problematic because of the difficulty of ensuring that adequate legal safeguards are complied with in partner third countries and international organizations. At the same time, the way in which the ongoing interoperability initiatives regarding the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) databases may influence Europol’s international cooperation raises arguably a set of new legal and practical questions that require urgent consideration. This article examines these issues by connecting the Europol-specific legal framework and international practice to the recently adopted AFSJ interoperability regulations as well as to the EU broader data protection framework. It looks more specifically at the balance between data protection/fundamental rights and operational effectiveness throughout Europol’s legal framework and practice of international cooperation and examines the implications of interoperability of AFSJ databases on this. On the one hand, interoperability of AFSJ databases is likely to boost Europol as an information hub through extended personal data collection and data processing possibilities, thereby making the Agency more attractive to international partners. On the other hand, the possibility to transfer such data outside the EU requires strong and effective safeguards from a data protection perspective. The article tentatively concludes that Europol’s current legal and practical framework for international cooperation seems to tilt the balance on the side of operational effectiveness to the detriment of data protection and fundamental rights, and that the new possibilities offered by the interoperability of AFSJ databases will further enhance this trend. Europol, international cooperation, interoperability, AFSJ databases, data protection, fundamental rights, effective police cooperation
{"title":"Europol’s International Exchanges of Data and Interoperability of AFSJ Databases","authors":"Florin Coman-Kund","doi":"10.54648/euro2020010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020010","url":null,"abstract":"Data sharing and interoperability aspects of Europol’s information systems outside the EU are particularly problematic because of the difficulty of ensuring that adequate legal safeguards are complied with in partner third countries and international organizations. At the same time, the way in which the ongoing interoperability initiatives regarding the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ) databases may influence Europol’s international cooperation raises arguably a set of new legal and practical questions that require urgent consideration. This article examines these issues by connecting the Europol-specific legal framework and international practice to the recently adopted AFSJ interoperability regulations as well as to the EU broader data protection framework. It looks more specifically at the balance between data protection/fundamental rights and operational effectiveness throughout Europol’s legal framework and practice of international cooperation and examines the implications of interoperability of AFSJ databases on this. On the one hand, interoperability of AFSJ databases is likely to boost Europol as an information hub through extended personal data collection and data processing possibilities, thereby making the Agency more attractive to international partners. On the other hand, the possibility to transfer such data outside the EU requires strong and effective safeguards from a data protection perspective. The article tentatively concludes that Europol’s current legal and practical framework for international cooperation seems to tilt the balance on the side of operational effectiveness to the detriment of data protection and fundamental rights, and that the new possibilities offered by the interoperability of AFSJ databases will further enhance this trend.\u0000Europol, international cooperation, interoperability, AFSJ databases, data protection, fundamental rights, effective police cooperation","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42725486","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
At present EU institutions and agencies as well as national legislators have ambitious agendas on law enforcement authorities’ access to interoperable information systems, which have become a defining feature of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ). They are the most advanced form of information exchange, conferring direct information access to competent authorities. Interoperable information systems are intended for the exchange of raw material for investigation purposes, which at a later stage could become evidence at trial. Interoperable information systems challenge existing cooperation dynamics and redefine the role of the actors involved. It is questionable whether mutual recognition and approximation, which have been considered the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters for many years, can describe alone integration dynamics in law enforcement cooperation, particularly with reference to information sharing. This article appraises whether, and to what extent, law enforcement access to and use of interoperable information systems constitute new modes of law enforcement cooperation in the EU AFSJ. It then assesses what would be the implications of such a paradigm shift on information management. After a short overview of the main features of interoperability, it addresses whether and how the establishment and functioning of interoperable information systems actually or potentially redefines the existing distribution of tasks between the EU and Member States and among competent authorities of different kinds. European Union, Area of Freedom Security and Justice, law enforcement, information management, interoperability, approximation, mutual recognition, principle of availability, platform integration
{"title":"Interoperable Databases: New Cooperation Dynamics in the EU AFSJ?","authors":"F. Galli","doi":"10.54648/euro2020007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020007","url":null,"abstract":"At present EU institutions and agencies as well as national legislators have ambitious agendas on law enforcement authorities’ access to interoperable information systems, which have become a defining feature of the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ). They are the most advanced form of information exchange, conferring direct information access to competent authorities. Interoperable information systems are intended for the exchange of raw material for investigation purposes, which at a later stage could become evidence at trial. Interoperable information systems challenge existing cooperation dynamics and redefine the role of the actors involved. It is questionable whether mutual recognition and approximation, which have been considered the cornerstone of judicial cooperation in both civil and criminal matters for many years, can describe alone integration dynamics in law enforcement cooperation, particularly with reference to information sharing. This article appraises whether, and to what extent, law enforcement access to and use of interoperable information systems constitute new modes of law enforcement cooperation in the EU AFSJ. It then assesses what would be the implications of such a paradigm shift on information management. After a short overview of the main features of interoperability, it addresses whether and how the establishment and functioning of interoperable information systems actually or potentially redefines the existing distribution of tasks between the EU and Member States and among competent authorities of different kinds.\u0000European Union, Area of Freedom Security and Justice, law enforcement, information management, interoperability, approximation, mutual recognition, principle of availability, platform integration","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46263247","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Brexit’s Challenge to the UK’s Unwritten Constitution","authors":"Patrick Birkinshaw","doi":"10.54648/euro2020002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44823343","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"European Court of Human Rights: May 2018 to April 2019","authors":"A. Mowbray","doi":"10.54648/euro2020001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42596008","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In recent years, the discourse surrounding migration, asylum and related security concerns have, in most EU Member States, become deeply contentious. Following the 2015 migration crisis, the shortcomings of the EU asylum system became strikingly evident. The subsequent terrorist attacks inaugurated the beginning of a series of revisions to databases used for border control, the registration of asylum seekers and visa applicants, or for alerts regarding criminals. As a final step, the Commission issued two proposals to render all EU databases interoperable in order to provide authorities with better information to tackle identity fraud, prevent irregular migration and mitigate security risks. In May 2019, the Interoperability Regulations were adopted by the co-legislators. Europol and Frontex, two EU Agencies that have been actively engaged in a wide range of operational activities at the external Schengen borders, will be authorized to consult and may subsequently request full access to the interoperable system. This contribution will address some of the concerns that emerge with the connection of originally disconnected databases and seeks to analyse the discrepancies that may arise in the context of interoperability where systematic data exchanges take place between actors that apply different data protection regimes. Interoperability, Europol, EBCGA, Eurosur, Data Protection, AFSJ, EU Databases, Border Control, Data Quality, Supervision
{"title":"Interoperable Data Exchanges Within Different Data Protection Regimes: The Case of Europol and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency","authors":"T. Quintel","doi":"10.54648/euro2020011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/euro2020011","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, the discourse surrounding migration, asylum and related security concerns have, in most EU Member States, become deeply contentious. Following the 2015 migration crisis, the shortcomings of the EU asylum system became strikingly evident. The subsequent terrorist attacks inaugurated the beginning of a series of revisions to databases used for border control, the registration of asylum seekers and visa applicants, or for alerts regarding criminals.\u0000As a final step, the Commission issued two proposals to render all EU databases interoperable in order to provide authorities with better information to tackle identity fraud, prevent irregular migration and mitigate security risks. In May 2019, the Interoperability Regulations were adopted by the co-legislators.\u0000Europol and Frontex, two EU Agencies that have been actively engaged in a wide range of operational activities at the external Schengen borders, will be authorized to consult and may subsequently request full access to the interoperable system.\u0000This contribution will address some of the concerns that emerge with the connection of originally disconnected databases and seeks to analyse the discrepancies that may arise in the context of interoperability where systematic data exchanges take place between actors that apply different data protection regimes.\u0000Interoperability, Europol, EBCGA, Eurosur, Data Protection, AFSJ, EU Databases, Border Control, Data Quality, Supervision","PeriodicalId":43955,"journal":{"name":"European Public Law","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49555719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：