Pub Date : 2021-10-25DOI: 10.1177/09240519211052931
Stoutt
This book explores violence against the environment within the broad scope of transnational environmental crime (TEC): its extent, perpetrators, and responses. TEC has become one of the greatest threats to environmental and human security today, as well as a lucrative enterprise and a mode of life in many regions of the world. Transnational Spheres of Ecoviolence argues that we cannot seriously consider stopping TEC without also promoting environmental (and climate) justice. The spheres covered range from wildlife and plant crime to illegal fisheries to toxic waste and climate crime. These acts of violence against the environment are both localized in terms of event and impact, and globalized in terms of market drivers and internationalized responses. Because it is so often intimately linked to political violence, coerced labor, economic and physical displacement, and development opportunity costs, ecoviolence must be viewed primarily as a human security issue; the fight against it must derive legitimacy from impacts on local communities, and be twinned wth the protection of environmental activists. Reliance on the generosity of distant corporations or the effectiveness of legal structures will not be adequate; and militarized responses may do more harm to human security than good to nature. A transformative approach to transnational ecoviolence is a very complex task affected by the geopolitics of neoliberalism, authoritarian states, rebel factions and extremists, socio-economic patterns, and many other factors. In this challenging text, the authors capture this complexity in digestible form and offer a wide-ranging discussion of commensurate policy recommendations for governments and the general public.
{"title":"Recent publications in international human rights law","authors":"Stoutt","doi":"10.1177/09240519211052931","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519211052931","url":null,"abstract":"This book explores violence against the environment within the broad scope of transnational environmental crime (TEC): its extent, perpetrators, and responses. TEC has become one of the greatest threats to environmental and human security today, as well as a lucrative enterprise and a mode of life in many regions of the world. Transnational Spheres of Ecoviolence argues that we cannot seriously consider stopping TEC without also promoting environmental (and climate) justice. The spheres covered range from wildlife and plant crime to illegal fisheries to toxic waste and climate crime. These acts of violence against the environment are both localized in terms of event and impact, and globalized in terms of market drivers and internationalized responses. Because it is so often intimately linked to political violence, coerced labor, economic and physical displacement, and development opportunity costs, ecoviolence must be viewed primarily as a human security issue; the fight against it must derive legitimacy from impacts on local communities, and be twinned wth the protection of environmental activists. Reliance on the generosity of distant corporations or the effectiveness of legal structures will not be adequate; and militarized responses may do more harm to human security than good to nature. A transformative approach to transnational ecoviolence is a very complex task affected by the geopolitics of neoliberalism, authoritarian states, rebel factions and extremists, socio-economic patterns, and many other factors. In this challenging text, the authors capture this complexity in digestible form and offer a wide-ranging discussion of commensurate policy recommendations for governments and the general public.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"1 1","pages":"335 - 340"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82328351","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-09DOI: 10.1177/02656914211052942
A. Buyse
It is a new truism that the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated an already dire human rights situation across the globe. The waves of protest that swept across the world in the year before the pandemic seemed to have been brought to a sudden halt due to lockdowns and restrictive laws. But at the same time, people everywhere have availed themselves of the wide protective scope of the freedom of assembly, newly re-emphasized in the Human Rights Committee's General Comment of 2020, to come together, protest, and make their voices heard in numerous creative ways. Amid the restrictions, there has been resilience.
{"title":"Pandemic protests: Creatively using the freedom of assembly during COVID-19","authors":"A. Buyse","doi":"10.1177/02656914211052942","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02656914211052942","url":null,"abstract":"It is a new truism that the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated an already dire human rights situation across the globe. The waves of protest that swept across the world in the year before the pandemic seemed to have been brought to a sudden halt due to lockdowns and restrictive laws. But at the same time, people everywhere have availed themselves of the wide protective scope of the freedom of assembly, newly re-emphasized in the Human Rights Committee's General Comment of 2020, to come together, protest, and make their voices heard in numerous creative ways. Amid the restrictions, there has been resilience.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"223 1","pages":"265 - 267"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75688232","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09240519211048009
A. Timmer, Moritz Baumgärtel, L. Kotzé, Lieneke Slingenberg
In the past decade or so, vulnerability has become a fairly prominent concept in human rights law. It has evolved from being an underlying notion to an explicit concept. This column takes stock of vulnerability's relationship to, and possible influence on human rights law, assessing the concept's potential and pitfalls. It focuses on the not altogether unrelated issues of migrants’ social rights and on the role of human rights in environmental protection. The discussion commences with a reflection on the potential of vulnerability to re-interrogate those aspects of the human rights paradigm that relate to environmental protection. The next section focuses on the potential of vulnerability to enhance migrants’ social rights within human rights law. Subsequently, it focuses on the pitfalls and the difficulties of the vulnerability concept. It concludes by offering an outlook for the future of the concept.
{"title":"The potential and pitfalls of the vulnerability concept for human rights","authors":"A. Timmer, Moritz Baumgärtel, L. Kotzé, Lieneke Slingenberg","doi":"10.1177/09240519211048009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519211048009","url":null,"abstract":"In the past decade or so, vulnerability has become a fairly prominent concept in human rights law. It has evolved from being an underlying notion to an explicit concept. This column takes stock of vulnerability's relationship to, and possible influence on human rights law, assessing the concept's potential and pitfalls. It focuses on the not altogether unrelated issues of migrants’ social rights and on the role of human rights in environmental protection. The discussion commences with a reflection on the potential of vulnerability to re-interrogate those aspects of the human rights paradigm that relate to environmental protection. The next section focuses on the potential of vulnerability to enhance migrants’ social rights within human rights law. Subsequently, it focuses on the pitfalls and the difficulties of the vulnerability concept. It concludes by offering an outlook for the future of the concept.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"14 1","pages":"190 - 197"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80122512","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09240519211033429
Katie Pentney
Undercover police operations have emerged from the shadows and into the spotlight in the United Kingdom as a result of a public inquiry into undercover policing and the enactment of the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act. The inquiry has revealed troubling details about the ways intelligence and police services have wielded their powers to infiltrate and undermine political groups and social movements over the course of five decades. The problem is not exclusive to the United Kingdom, but is seen the world over. Yet despite the widescale nature of the problem, the legality of agents provocateurs – undercover officers who infiltrate social and political movements to manipulate their messaging, instigate violent tactics and undermine public perception – has received scant attention in legal scholarship or the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. This article capitalises on the current spotlight to suggest that agents provocateurs can and should be conceived of as (potential) violations of the right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights. A purposive approach is required to ensure protection for not only the means of expression – the exchange of information and ideas – but also the ends – vibrant democratic discourse and meaningful public debate.
{"title":"Licensed to kill…discourse? agents provocateurs and a purposive right to freedom of expression","authors":"Katie Pentney","doi":"10.1177/09240519211033429","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519211033429","url":null,"abstract":"Undercover police operations have emerged from the shadows and into the spotlight in the United Kingdom as a result of a public inquiry into undercover policing and the enactment of the Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Act. The inquiry has revealed troubling details about the ways intelligence and police services have wielded their powers to infiltrate and undermine political groups and social movements over the course of five decades. The problem is not exclusive to the United Kingdom, but is seen the world over. Yet despite the widescale nature of the problem, the legality of agents provocateurs – undercover officers who infiltrate social and political movements to manipulate their messaging, instigate violent tactics and undermine public perception – has received scant attention in legal scholarship or the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights. This article capitalises on the current spotlight to suggest that agents provocateurs can and should be conceived of as (potential) violations of the right to freedom of expression under the European Convention on Human Rights. A purposive approach is required to ensure protection for not only the means of expression – the exchange of information and ideas – but also the ends – vibrant democratic discourse and meaningful public debate.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"78 1","pages":"241 - 257"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"88390493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09240519211044955
D. Kagiaros
The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or Court) has included civil servant whistleblowers in the protective ambit of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The article argues that the Court should revisit its approach to proportionality in such cases. When determining whether a restriction to a civil servant whistleblower's free speech was necessary in a democratic society, the Court weighs what the article identifies as the quasi-public watchdog function of whistleblowers (namely their role in imparting information on matters of public concern) against their duties and responsibilities as civil servants. In some instances, the Court gives primacy to whistleblowers’ duties of loyalty to the government over their contribution to the accountability of public bodies. The article challenges this approach on the basis that it fails to adequately consider the key justification that underpins the Court's recognition of whistleblowing as speech, namely the audience interest in receiving the information the whistleblower discloses. The article argues that the Court should give primacy to the watchdog function of whistleblowers. It concludes by making suggestions on how the ECtHR can adopt a more principled approach to proportionality in whistleblowing cases.
{"title":"Reassessing the framework for the protection of civil servant whistleblowers in the European Court of Human Rights","authors":"D. Kagiaros","doi":"10.1177/09240519211044955","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519211044955","url":null,"abstract":"The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR or Court) has included civil servant whistleblowers in the protective ambit of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The article argues that the Court should revisit its approach to proportionality in such cases. When determining whether a restriction to a civil servant whistleblower's free speech was necessary in a democratic society, the Court weighs what the article identifies as the quasi-public watchdog function of whistleblowers (namely their role in imparting information on matters of public concern) against their duties and responsibilities as civil servants. In some instances, the Court gives primacy to whistleblowers’ duties of loyalty to the government over their contribution to the accountability of public bodies. The article challenges this approach on the basis that it fails to adequately consider the key justification that underpins the Court's recognition of whistleblowing as speech, namely the audience interest in receiving the information the whistleblower discloses. The article argues that the Court should give primacy to the watchdog function of whistleblowers. It concludes by making suggestions on how the ECtHR can adopt a more principled approach to proportionality in whistleblowing cases.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"36 1","pages":"220 - 240"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86354050","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-01DOI: 10.1177/09240519211035295
{"title":"NQHR September 2021","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/09240519211035295","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519211035295","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"22 1","pages":"189 - 189"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73296195","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-23DOI: 10.1177/09240519211033419
S. Berry, Isilay Taban
While UN treaty bodies have sought to address forms of oppression resulting from the intersection of gender, race and/or disability through their practice, they rarely recognise the experience of groups at the intersection of other social categories. This article uses the lens of intersectionality to analyse the practice of UN treaty bodies in relation to the intersection of minority and refugee status. We argue that while minority-refugees have fled persecution connected to their minority status, UN treaty bodies have failed to appreciate the impact of their location at the intersection of persons belonging to minorities and refugees in host States on their right to preserve their cultural identity. By failing to address the distinct experience of minority-refugees, UN treaty bodies risk participating in their oppression. Further, we reveal that current practice not only has potentially negative consequences for minority-refugees – as both individuals and groups – and for the host society but may even undermine the ability of IHRL to achieve its overarching objectives.
{"title":"The right of minority-refugees to preserve their cultural identity: An intersectional analysis","authors":"S. Berry, Isilay Taban","doi":"10.1177/09240519211033419","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519211033419","url":null,"abstract":"While UN treaty bodies have sought to address forms of oppression resulting from the intersection of gender, race and/or disability through their practice, they rarely recognise the experience of groups at the intersection of other social categories. This article uses the lens of intersectionality to analyse the practice of UN treaty bodies in relation to the intersection of minority and refugee status. We argue that while minority-refugees have fled persecution connected to their minority status, UN treaty bodies have failed to appreciate the impact of their location at the intersection of persons belonging to minorities and refugees in host States on their right to preserve their cultural identity. By failing to address the distinct experience of minority-refugees, UN treaty bodies risk participating in their oppression. Further, we reveal that current practice not only has potentially negative consequences for minority-refugees – as both individuals and groups – and for the host society but may even undermine the ability of IHRL to achieve its overarching objectives.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"8 1","pages":"198 - 219"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"90012734","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-04DOI: 10.1177/09240519211035275
This edited collection investigates where the European Convention on Human Rights as a living instrument stands on migration and the rights of migrants. This book offers a comprehensive analysis of cases brought by migrants in different stages of migration, covering the right to flee, who is entitled to enter and remain in Europe, and what treatment is owed to them when they come within the jurisdiction of a Council of Europe member state. As such, the book evaluates the case law of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning different categories of migrants including asylum seekers, irregular migrants, those who have migrated through domestic lawful routes, and those who are currently second or third generation migrants in Europe. The broad perspective adopted by the book allows for a systematic analysis of how and to what extent the Convention protects non-refoulement, migrant children, family rights of migrants, status rights of migrants, economic and social rights of migrants, as well as cultural and religious rights of migrants.
{"title":"Recent publications in international human rights law","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/09240519211035275","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519211035275","url":null,"abstract":"This edited collection investigates where the European Convention on Human Rights as a living instrument stands on migration and the rights of migrants. This book offers a comprehensive analysis of cases brought by migrants in different stages of migration, covering the right to flee, who is entitled to enter and remain in Europe, and what treatment is owed to them when they come within the jurisdiction of a Council of Europe member state. As such, the book evaluates the case law of the European Convention on Human Rights concerning different categories of migrants including asylum seekers, irregular migrants, those who have migrated through domestic lawful routes, and those who are currently second or third generation migrants in Europe. The broad perspective adopted by the book allows for a systematic analysis of how and to what extent the Convention protects non-refoulement, migrant children, family rights of migrants, status rights of migrants, economic and social rights of migrants, as well as cultural and religious rights of migrants.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"56 1","pages":"258 - 261"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86790351","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-01DOI: 10.1177/09240519211020627
Sébastien Lorion, S. Lagoutte
This Special Issue aims at raising understanding of governmental human rights focal points (GHRFPs). It forms part of a renewed attention to the importance of domestic-level institutions within the international human rights regime. GHRFPs have emerged as a key recommendation of UN bodies, and a defined trend in setting up such State structures is observed in practice. Addressing GHRFPs as a single field of inquiry, this introductory article presents a common analytical approach, which makes it possible to analyse various forms of GHRFPs, with a view to generalising findings and enriching each type of GHRFP with the experiences and lessons learned of others. Hereby, the Special Issue consolidates and structures a research agenda on GHRFPs around key attributes identified in a preliminary manner, in order to spark some critical and constructive analysis of this specific manifestation of the domestic institutionalisation of human rights.
{"title":"What are Governmental Human Rights Focal Points?","authors":"Sébastien Lorion, S. Lagoutte","doi":"10.1177/09240519211020627","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519211020627","url":null,"abstract":"This Special Issue aims at raising understanding of governmental human rights focal points (GHRFPs). It forms part of a renewed attention to the importance of domestic-level institutions within the international human rights regime. GHRFPs have emerged as a key recommendation of UN bodies, and a defined trend in setting up such State structures is observed in practice. Addressing GHRFPs as a single field of inquiry, this introductory article presents a common analytical approach, which makes it possible to analyse various forms of GHRFPs, with a view to generalising findings and enriching each type of GHRFP with the experiences and lessons learned of others. Hereby, the Special Issue consolidates and structures a research agenda on GHRFPs around key attributes identified in a preliminary manner, in order to spark some critical and constructive analysis of this specific manifestation of the domestic institutionalisation of human rights.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"16 1","pages":"80 - 94"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81806597","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-01DOI: 10.1177/09240519211017669
Martin Mennecke
The Nuremberg judgement famously held that crimes against international law are committed by men, not by abstract entities – but who, then, is to prevent these crimes? In 2005, all UN Member States agreed that it was their responsibility to protect populations against atrocity crimes (short R2P). In 2010, the idea was born to appoint senior government officials to act as individual R2P Focal Points to help implement this historic pledge. This article critically examines the focal point idea and its practice, focusing on the experience of the Danish R2P Focal Point as well as the role of the Global Network of R2P Focal Point which today has members from 61 UN member states. The article highlights the significant potential of the R2P Focal Points but also a series of pre-conditions that need to be met if the appointment of a R2P Focal Point is not to remain a mere gesture.
{"title":"Never again? The role of the global network of R2P focal points in preventing atrocity crimes","authors":"Martin Mennecke","doi":"10.1177/09240519211017669","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09240519211017669","url":null,"abstract":"The Nuremberg judgement famously held that crimes against international law are committed by men, not by abstract entities – but who, then, is to prevent these crimes? In 2005, all UN Member States agreed that it was their responsibility to protect populations against atrocity crimes (short R2P). In 2010, the idea was born to appoint senior government officials to act as individual R2P Focal Points to help implement this historic pledge. This article critically examines the focal point idea and its practice, focusing on the experience of the Danish R2P Focal Point as well as the role of the Global Network of R2P Focal Point which today has members from 61 UN member states. The article highlights the significant potential of the R2P Focal Points but also a series of pre-conditions that need to be met if the appointment of a R2P Focal Point is not to remain a mere gesture.","PeriodicalId":44610,"journal":{"name":"Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights","volume":"51 1","pages":"161 - 181"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87474371","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","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：