The past decade has seen increased scholarly attention on the practice and latent potential of the United Nations General Assembly (‘Assembly’) to secure accountability for atrocity crimes. This increased focus has arisen primarily due to growing frustration over permanent member deadlock in the Security Council in the face of documented atrocities. One aspect of this nascent research agenda yet to be analysed is the invocation of the crime of genocide in Assembly resolutions and practice. Studies have shown the Security Council to have applied the genocide label selectively and only where aligned with the permanent members’ interests. Can the same be said about the Assembly? This article tracks the use of the genocide norm in Assembly resolutions, revealing two major functions: prescriptive and quasi-judicial. It notes that Resolution 96(I) (1946) has had a pervasive influence on the development of the crime of genocide. Still, later attempts in the Assembly to develop the genocide definition have enjoyed less success. Although the Assembly has been beset with political selectivity in the use of the genocide label, the rise of commissions of inquiry in UN practice can usefully augment a closer dialogue between their outputs and Assembly resolutions, as recent resolutions concerning alleged crimes against the Rohingya show.
{"title":"The Crime of Genocide in General Assembly Resolutions: Legal Foundations and Effects","authors":"M. Ramsden","doi":"10.1093/hrlr/ngab003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngab003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The past decade has seen increased scholarly attention on the practice and latent potential of the United Nations General Assembly (‘Assembly’) to secure accountability for atrocity crimes. This increased focus has arisen primarily due to growing frustration over permanent member deadlock in the Security Council in the face of documented atrocities. One aspect of this nascent research agenda yet to be analysed is the invocation of the crime of genocide in Assembly resolutions and practice. Studies have shown the Security Council to have applied the genocide label selectively and only where aligned with the permanent members’ interests. Can the same be said about the Assembly? This article tracks the use of the genocide norm in Assembly resolutions, revealing two major functions: prescriptive and quasi-judicial. It notes that Resolution 96(I) (1946) has had a pervasive influence on the development of the crime of genocide. Still, later attempts in the Assembly to develop the genocide definition have enjoyed less success. Although the Assembly has been beset with political selectivity in the use of the genocide label, the rise of commissions of inquiry in UN practice can usefully augment a closer dialogue between their outputs and Assembly resolutions, as recent resolutions concerning alleged crimes against the Rohingya show.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/hrlr/ngab003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46312334","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}
This article examines the dual responsibility of state authorities to repair past abuses and guarantee economic and social rights after episodes of widespread violence according to the jurisprudence of African human rights bodies. Two alternative frameworks underlying the practice of African bodies and human rights law more broadly are discussed. The first portrays the state as a threat to the individual, responsible for redressing the consequences of violations in breach of duties to respect and protect rights. The second understands the state as an active guarantor of rights in the aftermath of widespread abuses, responsible for improving the well-being of people affected and not affected by violence. In light of the possibilities and limitations that arise from both approaches in the African context, the article advocates the second.
{"title":"Economic and Social Rights, Reparations and the Aftermath of Widespread Violence: The African Human Rights System and Beyond","authors":"Felix E. Torres","doi":"10.1093/hrlr/ngab017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngab017","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article examines the dual responsibility of state authorities to repair past abuses and guarantee economic and social rights after episodes of widespread violence according to the jurisprudence of African human rights bodies. Two alternative frameworks underlying the practice of African bodies and human rights law more broadly are discussed. The first portrays the state as a threat to the individual, responsible for redressing the consequences of violations in breach of duties to respect and protect rights. The second understands the state as an active guarantor of rights in the aftermath of widespread abuses, responsible for improving the well-being of people affected and not affected by violence. In light of the possibilities and limitations that arise from both approaches in the African context, the article advocates the second.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45665529","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}
In Handyside v. The United Kingdom, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) held that the right to freedom of expression, as provided for in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects not only expressions that are favorably received but also those that ‘offend, shock or disturb’. 1 Yet, the Court has since developed a substantial body of inconsistent case-law allowing restrictions on ‘hate speech’ that severely questions the degree to which offensive, shocking and disturbing speech is truly protected by the ECHR. Against a qualitative and quantitative backdrop, the authors argue that the Court and previously the Commission, have adopted an overly restrictive approach to hate speech, which fails to provide adequate protection to political speech on controversial issues, including criticism of public officials and government institutions and has created an inconsistent and even arbitrary body of case law. Instead, jurisdictions that recognize a need to balance the freedom of expression with limits on hate speech have adopted more convincing approaches of hate speech, providing a robust protection of free speech while leaving room for the State to curtail the most extreme forms of non-violent hate speech.
{"title":"Hate Speech and the European Court of Human Rights: Whatever Happened to the Right to Offend, Shock or Disturb?","authors":"Jacob Mchangama, Natalie Alkiviadou","doi":"10.1093/HRLR/NGAB015","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB015","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 In Handyside v. The United Kingdom, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) held that the right to freedom of expression, as provided for in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects not only expressions that are favorably received but also those that ‘offend, shock or disturb’. 1 Yet, the Court has since developed a substantial body of inconsistent case-law allowing restrictions on ‘hate speech’ that severely questions the degree to which offensive, shocking and disturbing speech is truly protected by the ECHR. Against a qualitative and quantitative backdrop, the authors argue that the Court and previously the Commission, have adopted an overly restrictive approach to hate speech, which fails to provide adequate protection to political speech on controversial issues, including criticism of public officials and government institutions and has created an inconsistent and even arbitrary body of case law. Instead, jurisdictions that recognize a need to balance the freedom of expression with limits on hate speech have adopted more convincing approaches of hate speech, providing a robust protection of free speech while leaving room for the State to curtail the most extreme forms of non-violent hate speech.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49503701","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}
While anti-abortion activists have been successful in pushing to restrict access to abortion across the USA, reproductive rights activists have been mobilizing across Latin America to push for the easement of strict anti-abortion policies. These opposing directions of travel have renewed interest in which human rights arguments would best support the expansion of access to abortion in Latin America. To date, progress in this area has mostly relied on understanding that the prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment requires states to allow abortions in the direst of circumstances. However, the vast majority of women in the region who seek abortions do not qualify for the small exemptions contained in the law. Activists looking to expand abortion provisions beyond the cruelty paradigm therefore need to find arguments that can stand firm in a generally conservative Latin American region. In this search, the Inter-American System could, somewhat surprisingly, provide keys to constructing a new discourse surrounding reproductive rights based on a nuanced understanding of structural discrimination and a willingness to visibilise the suffering of women.
{"title":"Pushing Past the Tipping Point: Can the Inter-American System Accommodate Abortion Rights?","authors":"P. P. Zuloaga","doi":"10.1093/HRLR/NGAB014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB014","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 While anti-abortion activists have been successful in pushing to restrict access to abortion across the USA, reproductive rights activists have been mobilizing across Latin America to push for the easement of strict anti-abortion policies. These opposing directions of travel have renewed interest in which human rights arguments would best support the expansion of access to abortion in Latin America. To date, progress in this area has mostly relied on understanding that the prohibition of cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment requires states to allow abortions in the direst of circumstances. However, the vast majority of women in the region who seek abortions do not qualify for the small exemptions contained in the law. Activists looking to expand abortion provisions beyond the cruelty paradigm therefore need to find arguments that can stand firm in a generally conservative Latin American region. In this search, the Inter-American System could, somewhat surprisingly, provide keys to constructing a new discourse surrounding reproductive rights based on a nuanced understanding of structural discrimination and a willingness to visibilise the suffering of women.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB014","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45356393","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}
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) guarantees that persons with disabilities (‘PWD’) are to be equal before and under the law. There are almost identical equality guarantees in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Hong Kong's mini constitution – the Basic Law. Australia boasts similar legislative equality guarantees for PWD. The CRPD Committee has interpreted the right broadly, whereas constitutional courts have taken a proportionality approach, balancing the right to substantive equality against competing concerns. The tension between these methods of rights protection means the CRPD is being positioned as an alternative model of rights protection, but it is not an alternative mechanism for enforcement. This article calls on the Committee to modify its guidance to make suggestions to state parties as to how incremental advances in rights protection can be immediately implemented, even if in the short-term, these advances fall short of full inclusion.
{"title":"An Incremental Approach to Filling Protection Gaps in Equality Rights for Persons with Disabilities","authors":"Jane Richards","doi":"10.1093/HRLR/NGAB013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB013","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) guarantees that persons with disabilities (‘PWD’) are to be equal before and under the law. There are almost identical equality guarantees in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and Hong Kong's mini constitution – the Basic Law. Australia boasts similar legislative equality guarantees for PWD. The CRPD Committee has interpreted the right broadly, whereas constitutional courts have taken a proportionality approach, balancing the right to substantive equality against competing concerns. The tension between these methods of rights protection means the CRPD is being positioned as an alternative model of rights protection, but it is not an alternative mechanism for enforcement. This article calls on the Committee to modify its guidance to make suggestions to state parties as to how incremental advances in rights protection can be immediately implemented, even if in the short-term, these advances fall short of full inclusion.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB013","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42386554","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}
Children often face discrimination, bullying and even violence because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, as do children raised by parents who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). This article considers what the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child is doing to protect the rights of LGBT children and children with LGBT parents. To make such an assessment, this article critically analyses the Committee’s Concluding Observations over a ten-year period, its General Comments and its Views on Individual Communications. The conclusion reached is that while the Committee has made encouraging progress in recent years when it comes to addressing LGBT related issues, there is still room for improvement in the way the Committee seeks to protect children from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.
{"title":"Is the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child Doing Enough to Protect the Rights of LGBT Children and Children with Same-Sex Parents?","authors":"P. Gerber, A. Timoshanko","doi":"10.1093/HRLR/NGAB012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB012","url":null,"abstract":"Children often face discrimination, bullying and even violence because of their sexual orientation or gender identity, as do children raised by parents who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (LGBT). This article considers what the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child is doing to protect the rights of LGBT children and children with LGBT parents. To make such an assessment, this article critically analyses the Committee’s Concluding Observations over a ten-year period, its General Comments and its Views on Individual Communications. The conclusion reached is that while the Committee has made encouraging progress in recent years when it comes to addressing LGBT related issues, there is still room for improvement in the way the Committee seeks to protect children from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB012","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44599944","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}
Infrastructure projects, including roads, railways, power, telecommunications and water facilities, are considered necessary to promote many different human rights and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Infrastructure development has been a central feature of the Myanmar government’s policies, including the Myanmar Sustainable Development Plan 2018–2030, to sustain economic growth and achieve the SDGs. As in many countries, public–private partnerships are promoted to help implement these policies. Yet, infrastructure projects have been associated with serious human rights violations, including in Myanmar. This article explores the links between infrastructure, international human rights law and the SDGs. It analyses how this relationship is governed by international, domestic, ‘soft’ law and self-regulatory mechanisms. It then assesses Myanmar’s legal and policy framework for promoting infrastructure investment and implementing the SDGs. It concludes that there is scope to further clarify responsibilities and accountability mechanisms for the human rights impacts of infrastructure investment.
{"title":"Regulating Infrastructure: Human Rights and the Sustainable Development Goals in Myanmar","authors":"Emma J. Palmer","doi":"10.1093/HRLR/NGAB004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB004","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Infrastructure projects, including roads, railways, power, telecommunications and water facilities, are considered necessary to promote many different human rights and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Infrastructure development has been a central feature of the Myanmar government’s policies, including the Myanmar Sustainable Development Plan 2018–2030, to sustain economic growth and achieve the SDGs. As in many countries, public–private partnerships are promoted to help implement these policies. Yet, infrastructure projects have been associated with serious human rights violations, including in Myanmar. This article explores the links between infrastructure, international human rights law and the SDGs. It analyses how this relationship is governed by international, domestic, ‘soft’ law and self-regulatory mechanisms. It then assesses Myanmar’s legal and policy framework for promoting infrastructure investment and implementing the SDGs. It concludes that there is scope to further clarify responsibilities and accountability mechanisms for the human rights impacts of infrastructure investment.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43002564","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}
Athletes are not just sports people; they are certainly among the most prominent figures of their present time, playing an important role in shaping opinions with their power to inspire. For this very reason, athletes’ freedom of expression is strongly limited by the sport authorities in light of the fundamental principle of sport neutrality. This study analyses and questions the traditional constraints to athletes’ free speech by taking into consideration the role of human rights in sports legal order and in sporting affairs. By assuming an emerging relativization of sport political neutrality, the essay investigates the case-law concerning athletes’ freedom of expression identifying limits and perspectives of the current evolutions on athletes’ public statements, establishing to what extent a reform of the present sporting regulation on freedom of expression is needed.
{"title":"Athletes’ Freedom of Expression: The Relative Political Neutrality of Sport","authors":"A. Marco","doi":"10.1093/HRLR/NGAB009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB009","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Athletes are not just sports people; they are certainly among the most prominent figures of their present time, playing an important role in shaping opinions with their power to inspire. For this very reason, athletes’ freedom of expression is strongly limited by the sport authorities in light of the fundamental principle of sport neutrality. This study analyses and questions the traditional constraints to athletes’ free speech by taking into consideration the role of human rights in sports legal order and in sporting affairs. By assuming an emerging relativization of sport political neutrality, the essay investigates the case-law concerning athletes’ freedom of expression identifying limits and perspectives of the current evolutions on athletes’ public statements, establishing to what extent a reform of the present sporting regulation on freedom of expression is needed.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-05-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB009","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43036603","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}
Under the League of Arab States’ human rights regime, Arab countries are governed by the Arab Charter of Human Rights 2004. The Charter, however, lacks an enforcement mechanism. The Statute of the Arab Court of Human Rights 2014 aims to fill this enforcement void. This article addresses the criticism that, because it fails to provide for a direct right of individual petition, the Statute is not fit for purpose. It is argued contrarily that, within the context of an Arab human rights system, the Court should be welcomed as an important step in the process of establishing an effective regime.
{"title":"The Arab Court of Human Rights and the Enforcement of the Arab Charter on Human Rights","authors":"A. Almutawa","doi":"10.1093/HRLR/NGAB008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB008","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Under the League of Arab States’ human rights regime, Arab countries are governed by the Arab Charter of Human Rights 2004. The Charter, however, lacks an enforcement mechanism. The Statute of the Arab Court of Human Rights 2014 aims to fill this enforcement void. This article addresses the criticism that, because it fails to provide for a direct right of individual petition, the Statute is not fit for purpose. It is argued contrarily that, within the context of an Arab human rights system, the Court should be welcomed as an important step in the process of establishing an effective regime.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47995555","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}
Article 31(1) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) provides all children, everywhere, with the right to play. The CRC is the most widely ratified international human rights treaty, yet children’s right to play is considered ‘the forgotten right’. The widespread State inaction to fulfil this right could be partly due to continued uncertainty about how to define play. This Article argues for the application a large body of recent research with the group most qualified to determine whether activities are play or not: young children. This research demonstrates that choice and autonomy are two universal and essential indicia for an activity to be experienced as play. The Article contends that the fulfilment of young children’s right to play would significantly increase if early childhood education and care (ECEC) institutions within States utilised these two indicia within daily programmed activities and in ECEC policies.
{"title":"Article 31, 31 Years On: Choice and Autonomy as a Framework for Implementing Children’s Right to Play in Early Childhood Services","authors":"Yeshe Colliver, Holly Doel-Mackaway","doi":"10.1093/HRLR/NGAB011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Article 31(1) of the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) provides all children, everywhere, with the right to play. The CRC is the most widely ratified international human rights treaty, yet children’s right to play is considered ‘the forgotten right’. The widespread State inaction to fulfil this right could be partly due to continued uncertainty about how to define play. This Article argues for the application a large body of recent research with the group most qualified to determine whether activities are play or not: young children. This research demonstrates that choice and autonomy are two universal and essential indicia for an activity to be experienced as play. The Article contends that the fulfilment of young children’s right to play would significantly increase if early childhood education and care (ECEC) institutions within States utilised these two indicia within daily programmed activities and in ECEC policies.","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5,"publicationDate":"2021-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/HRLR/NGAB011","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42725161","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：