Countermeasures under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures: Between the Aircraft Manufacturing Industry and Society
Abstract
Countermeasures under World Trade Organization (WTO) law are separated into two categories, remedies and a method to induce compliance after another defaulting state fails to adhere to WTO's panel recommendation. This article will focus on the second category. The term ‘countermeasures’ specifically refers to an act of suspension of concessions or other obligations. One case of granted countermeasures is DS316, a case between the United States of America (US) and the European Union (EU). The issue of this case is the subsidies granted by the EU for Airbus, an aircraft manufacturer based in Europe which consists of four European nations, which resulted in Boeing's market loss. The US then requested countermeasures authorisation by the WTO. Countermeasures are related to the principle of proportionality both under public international law and WTO law. Additionally, countermeasures can lead to a more complex situation since it affects the human rights of the private actors of international trade as a part of society. This article explains the implementation of both the countermeasures and the proportionality principle, and analyses the precedents of cases and the countermeasures granted by the WTO as well as the effects of the granted countermeasures to society as it creates barriers for all the international trade actors.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Books
Adolf, Huala and An-An Chandrawulan. Masalah-Masalah Hukum dalam Perdagangan Internasional, Bandung: Rajagrafindo Persada, 1995.
Babu, R. Rajesh. Remedies under the WTO Legal System, Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV, 2012
Crawford, James. The International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text, and Commentaries, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Dörr, Oliver and Albrecht Randelzhofer. "Purposes and Principles, Article 2 (4)," in The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, Volume I (3rd Edition), edited by Bruno Simma, Daniel-Erasmus Khan and et.al. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Goode, Walter. Dictionary of Trade Policy Terms, 6th ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020.
Limenta, Michelle. WTO Retaliation: Effectiveness and Purposes, Portland: Hart Publishing, 2017.
Malanczuk, Peter. Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law, 7th revised ed., Routledge, New York, 1997.
Matsushita, Mitsuo, et al. the World Trade Organization: Law, Practice, and Policy Third Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
Müller, Wolfgang. WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures: A Commentary, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Putra, Ida Bagus Wyasa and Ni Ketut Supasti Dharmawan. Hukum Perdagangan Internasional, Bandung: Refika Aditama, 2017.
Shaw, Malcolm. International Law, 6th ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Wu, Mark. Re-examining ‘Green Light’ Subsidies in the Wake of New Green Industrial Policies, Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, 2015.
Journal Article
Alemanno, Alberto. “European Court Rejects Damages Claim from Innocent Bystanders in ‘Banana War’’, ASIL Insight, Vol. 12, no. 21 (2008).
Bronckers, Marco and Sophie Goelen. “Financial Liability of the EU for Violations of WTO Law: A Legislative Proposal Benefiting 'Innocent Bystanders'', Legal Issues of Economic Integration 39, no. 4 (2012): 399–418.
Çalişkan, Özgür. “An Analysis of the Airbus-Boeing Dispute from the Perspective of the WTO Process”, Ege Academic Review 10, no. 4, October (2010): 1129-1138. https://doi.org/10.21121/eab.2010419599.
Carbaugh, Robert J. & John Olienyk. “Boeing-Airbus Subsidy Dispute: A Sequel”, Global Economy Journal 4, no. 2, (2004): Article 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1524-5861.1047.
Charnovitz, Steve. “Rethinking Trade Sanctions”, American Journal of International Law 1 (2001): 792-832.
Damrosch, Lori Fisler. “Retaliation or Arbitration—or Both? The 1978 US-France Aviation Dispute”, American Journal of International Law 74, no. 4 (1980): 785-807. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2201024.
Dani, Marco. “Remedying European Legal Pluralism: The FIAMM and Fedon Litigation and the Judicial Protection of International Trade Bystanders”, European Journal of International Law 21, no. 2 (2010): 303-340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chq026.
Diggelmann, Oliver and Maria Nicole Cleis. “How the Right to Privacy Became a Human Right”, Human Rights Law Review 14, no. 3 (2014): 441-458. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngu014.
Fitzgerald, Eliza. “Helping States Help Themselves: Rethinking the Doctrine of Countermeasures: Are Countermeasures an Effective Means of Resolving Disputes between States?”, Macquarie Law Journal 16 (2016): 67-88.
Gill, Kawal and Panya Baldia. “Going Bananas: A Glimpse into WTO’s Dispute Settlement Mechanism”, Journal of International Business 5, no. 1, (2018): 107-125. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17492/focus.v5i01.13135.
Gössling, Stefan, Fichert Frank and Peter Forsyth. “Subsidies in Aviation”, Sustainability 9, (2017). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081295.
Irwina, Douglas A. and Nina Pavcnik. "Airbus versus Boeing Revisited: International Competition in the Aircraft Market", Journal of International Economics 64 (2004): 223-245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2003.08.006
Kienstra, Jeffrey D. “Cleared for Landing: Airbus, Boeing, and the WTO Dispute over Subsidies to Large Civil Aircraft”, Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business 32, no.3, (2012): 569-606.
Lemieux, Pierre. “Ottawa Wins a Jet Battle, but Canadians Lose,” Wall Street Journal A17, (2000).
Losari, Junianto J. and Michael Ewing-Chow. “A Clash of Treaties: The Lawfulness of Countermeasures in International Trade Law and International Investment Law”, Journal of World Investment and Trade 16, (2015): 274-313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/22119000-01602003.
Manner, Jennifer A. “How To Avoid Airbus II: A Primer For Domestic Industry”, California Western International Law Journal 23, no. 1 (1992): 139-176.
Mathis, Marc C. “Uncivil Aviation: How the Ongoing Trade Dispute Stalemate between Boeing and Airbus has Undermined GATT and May Continue to Usher in an Era of International Agreement Obsolescence under the World Trade Organization”, Tulsa Journal of Comparative and International Law 13, no. 1, (2005): 177-215.
Mitchell, Andrew D. “Proportionality and Remedies in WTO Disputes”, EJIL. 17, No. 5 (2006): 985-1008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chl034
Pauwelyn, Joost. “The Role of Public International Law in the WTO: How Far Can We Go?”, American Journal of International Law 95, (2001): 535-578. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2668492.
Powell, Jim. “Why Trade Retaliation Closes Markets and Impoverishes People”, Policy Analysis 43, (1990).
Reich, Arie. “The Effectiveness of the WTO Dispute Settlement System: A Statistical Analysis”, EUI Working Paper Law 11, (2017). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2997094.
Sitanggang, Dyan F. D. “Posisi, Tantangan, dan Prospek Bagi Indonesia dalam Sistem Penyelesaian Sengketa WTO”, Veritas et Justitia 3, no. 1. (2017): 92-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25123/vej.2526.
Soeparna, Intan Innayatun. ‘The Impact of the WTO Retaliation from the Perspective of Human Rights Law”, Mimbar Hukum 20, no. 3 (2008): 411-588. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.16290.
International Agreements
Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the United States of America Concerning the Application of the GATT Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft on Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, 17 July 1992.
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, 1 January 1995.
Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft, 1 January 1980.
Charter of the United Nations, 24 October 1945.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 1 January 1948.
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural, 3 January 1976.
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, 1 January 1995.
Cases
Air Services Agreement of 27 March 1946, (US v. France), 1978.
Brazil – Aircraft, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement WT/DS46/ARB, 28 August 2000.
Canada – Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft, WT/DS222/R, WTO, Report of the Panel.
Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft — Recourse to Arbitration by Canada under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision by the Arbitrator, 17 February 2003, WT/DS222/ARB.
EC — Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, Recourse to Arbitration by the European Communities under Article 22.6 of the DSU, WT/DS27/ARB, 9 April 1999.
EC and certain member States – Large Civil Aircraft (Article 21.5 – US), WT/DS316, WTO, Appellate Body Report, 18 May 2011.
Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/ARB, WTO, Recourse to Article 22.6 of the DSU by the European Union Decision by the Arbitrator, 2 October 2019.
Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/R, WTO, Panel Report, 18 May 2011.
Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/1, WTO, Request for Consultations by the US.
Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), ICJ, Judgment, 1997.
US – Continued Suspension, Appellate Body Report, WT/DS320/AB/R, 16 October 2008.
____, FSC, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, WT/DS108/ARB, 30 August 2002.
Gambling and Betting, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU, WT/DS285/ARB, 21 December 2007.
Subsidies on Upland Cotton, WT/DS267/AB/R. Report of the Appellate Body.
Subsidies on Upland Cotton, WT/DS267/R, Report of the Panel.
Washing Machines, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, WT/DS464/ARB, Decision by the Arbitrator, 8 February 2019.
Website
DS316: European Communities and Certain member States — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds316_e.htm
European Commission, Press Release, EU and Airbus Member States take action to ensure full compliance in the WTO aircraft dispute, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1405
Patrick Barkham, The Guardian, “The Banana Wars Explained”, https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/mar/05/eu.wto3
Ruta Burbaite, “Airbus Slapped with 10% Tariffs, Industry to Lose More, It Says”, https://www.aerotime.aero/24027-airbus-slapped-with-10-tariffs-industry-to-lose-more-it-says
Summary of the US – Upland Cotton, DS267, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/1pagesum_e/ds267sum_e.pdf
US holds off on threatened tariff hike in EU Airbus fight, https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53756201
WTO, WTO Analytical Index: SCM Agreement – Article 7 (Jurisprudence), https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/ai17_e/subsidies_art7_jur.pdf
Others
Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, G.A. Res. 56/83, Annex, Uar.N. GAOR, 56th Sess., U.N. Doc. T A/RES/56/83
Office of the United States Trade Representative, Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 124, Annex I.
UNGA, Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, A/RES/2625 (XXV), 24 October 1970, https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/25A1C8E35B23161C852570C4006E50AB
US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, “Competing Economies: America, Europe, and the Pacific Rim”, OTA-ITE-498, Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 1991.
Books
Adolf, Huala and An-An Chandrawulan. Masalah-Masalah Hukum dalam Perdagangan Internasional, Bandung: Rajagrafindo Persada, 1995.
Babu, R. Rajesh. Remedies under the WTO Legal System, Leiden: Koninklijke Brill NV, 2012
Crawford, James. The International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility: Introduction, Text, and Commentaries, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002.
Dörr, Oliver and Albrecht Randelzhofer. "Purposes and Principles, Article 2 (4)," in The Charter of the United Nations: A Commentary, Volume I (3rd Edition), edited by Bruno Simma, Daniel-Erasmus Khan and et.al. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012.
Goode, Walter. Dictionary of Trade Policy Terms, 6th ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020.
Limenta, Michelle. WTO Retaliation: Effectiveness and Purposes, Portland: Hart Publishing, 2017.
Malanczuk, Peter. Akehurst’s Modern Introduction to International Law, 7th revised ed., Routledge, New York, 1997.
Matsushita, Mitsuo, et al. the World Trade Organization: Law, Practice, and Policy Third Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015.
Müller, Wolfgang. WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures: A Commentary, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
Putra, Ida Bagus Wyasa and Ni Ketut Supasti Dharmawan. Hukum Perdagangan Internasional, Bandung: Refika Aditama, 2017.
Shaw, Malcolm. International Law, 6th ed., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
Wu, Mark. Re-examining ‘Green Light’ Subsidies in the Wake of New Green Industrial Policies, Geneva: International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, 2015.
Journal Article
Alemanno, Alberto. “European Court Rejects Damages Claim from Innocent Bystanders in ‘Banana War’’, ASIL Insight, Vol. 12, no. 21 (2008).
Bronckers, Marco and Sophie Goelen. “Financial Liability of the EU for Violations of WTO Law: A Legislative Proposal Benefiting 'Innocent Bystanders'', Legal Issues of Economic Integration 39, no. 4 (2012): 399–418.
Çalişkan, Özgür. “An Analysis of the Airbus-Boeing Dispute from the Perspective of the WTO Process”, Ege Academic Review 10, no. 4, October (2010): 1129-1138. https://doi.org/10.21121/eab.2010419599.
Carbaugh, Robert J. & John Olienyk. “Boeing-Airbus Subsidy Dispute: A Sequel”, Global Economy Journal 4, no. 2, (2004): Article 6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2202/1524-5861.1047.
Charnovitz, Steve. “Rethinking Trade Sanctions”, American Journal of International Law 1 (2001): 792-832.
Damrosch, Lori Fisler. “Retaliation or Arbitration—or Both? The 1978 US-France Aviation Dispute”, American Journal of International Law 74, no. 4 (1980): 785-807. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2201024.
Dani, Marco. “Remedying European Legal Pluralism: The FIAMM and Fedon Litigation and the Judicial Protection of International Trade Bystanders”, European Journal of International Law 21, no. 2 (2010): 303-340. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chq026.
Diggelmann, Oliver and Maria Nicole Cleis. “How the Right to Privacy Became a Human Right”, Human Rights Law Review 14, no. 3 (2014): 441-458. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngu014.
Fitzgerald, Eliza. “Helping States Help Themselves: Rethinking the Doctrine of Countermeasures: Are Countermeasures an Effective Means of Resolving Disputes between States?”, Macquarie Law Journal 16 (2016): 67-88.
Gill, Kawal and Panya Baldia. “Going Bananas: A Glimpse into WTO’s Dispute Settlement Mechanism”, Journal of International Business 5, no. 1, (2018): 107-125. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17492/focus.v5i01.13135.
Gössling, Stefan, Fichert Frank and Peter Forsyth. “Subsidies in Aviation”, Sustainability 9, (2017). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su9081295.
Irwina, Douglas A. and Nina Pavcnik. "Airbus versus Boeing Revisited: International Competition in the Aircraft Market", Journal of International Economics 64 (2004): 223-245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2003.08.006
Kienstra, Jeffrey D. “Cleared for Landing: Airbus, Boeing, and the WTO Dispute over Subsidies to Large Civil Aircraft”, Northwestern Journal of International Law and Business 32, no.3, (2012): 569-606.
Lemieux, Pierre. “Ottawa Wins a Jet Battle, but Canadians Lose,” Wall Street Journal A17, (2000).
Losari, Junianto J. and Michael Ewing-Chow. “A Clash of Treaties: The Lawfulness of Countermeasures in International Trade Law and International Investment Law”, Journal of World Investment and Trade 16, (2015): 274-313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/22119000-01602003.
Manner, Jennifer A. “How To Avoid Airbus II: A Primer For Domestic Industry”, California Western International Law Journal 23, no. 1 (1992): 139-176.
Mathis, Marc C. “Uncivil Aviation: How the Ongoing Trade Dispute Stalemate between Boeing and Airbus has Undermined GATT and May Continue to Usher in an Era of International Agreement Obsolescence under the World Trade Organization”, Tulsa Journal of Comparative and International Law 13, no. 1, (2005): 177-215.
Mitchell, Andrew D. “Proportionality and Remedies in WTO Disputes”, EJIL. 17, No. 5 (2006): 985-1008. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chl034
Pauwelyn, Joost. “The Role of Public International Law in the WTO: How Far Can We Go?”, American Journal of International Law 95, (2001): 535-578. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2668492.
Powell, Jim. “Why Trade Retaliation Closes Markets and Impoverishes People”, Policy Analysis 43, (1990).
Reich, Arie. “The Effectiveness of the WTO Dispute Settlement System: A Statistical Analysis”, EUI Working Paper Law 11, (2017). DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2997094.
Sitanggang, Dyan F. D. “Posisi, Tantangan, dan Prospek Bagi Indonesia dalam Sistem Penyelesaian Sengketa WTO”, Veritas et Justitia 3, no. 1. (2017): 92-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25123/vej.2526.
Soeparna, Intan Innayatun. ‘The Impact of the WTO Retaliation from the Perspective of Human Rights Law”, Mimbar Hukum 20, no. 3 (2008): 411-588. DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jmh.16290.
International Agreements
Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Government of the United States of America Concerning the Application of the GATT Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft on Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, 17 July 1992.
Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, 1 January 1995.
Agreement on Trade in Civil Aircraft, 1 January 1980.
Charter of the United Nations, 24 October 1945.
General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 1 January 1948.
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural, 3 January 1976.
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlement of Disputes, 1 January 1995.
Cases
Air Services Agreement of 27 March 1946, (US v. France), 1978.
Brazil – Aircraft, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement WT/DS46/ARB, 28 August 2000.
Canada – Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft, WT/DS222/R, WTO, Report of the Panel.
Export Credits and Loan Guarantees for Regional Aircraft — Recourse to Arbitration by Canada under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, Decision by the Arbitrator, 17 February 2003, WT/DS222/ARB.
EC — Regime for the Importation, Sale and Distribution of Bananas, Recourse to Arbitration by the European Communities under Article 22.6 of the DSU, WT/DS27/ARB, 9 April 1999.
EC and certain member States – Large Civil Aircraft (Article 21.5 – US), WT/DS316, WTO, Appellate Body Report, 18 May 2011.
Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/ARB, WTO, Recourse to Article 22.6 of the DSU by the European Union Decision by the Arbitrator, 2 October 2019.
Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/R, WTO, Panel Report, 18 May 2011.
Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, WT/DS316/1, WTO, Request for Consultations by the US.
Gabčíkovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v. Slovakia), ICJ, Judgment, 1997.
US – Continued Suspension, Appellate Body Report, WT/DS320/AB/R, 16 October 2008.
____, FSC, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, WT/DS108/ARB, 30 August 2002.
Gambling and Betting, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU, WT/DS285/ARB, 21 December 2007.
Subsidies on Upland Cotton, WT/DS267/AB/R. Report of the Appellate Body.
Subsidies on Upland Cotton, WT/DS267/R, Report of the Panel.
Washing Machines, Recourse to Arbitration by the United States under Article 22.6 of the DSU and Article 4.11 of the SCM Agreement, WT/DS464/ARB, Decision by the Arbitrator, 8 February 2019.
Website
DS316: European Communities and Certain member States — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds316_e.htm
European Commission, Press Release, EU and Airbus Member States take action to ensure full compliance in the WTO aircraft dispute, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_20_1405
Patrick Barkham, The Guardian, “The Banana Wars Explained”, https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/mar/05/eu.wto3
Ruta Burbaite, “Airbus Slapped with 10% Tariffs, Industry to Lose More, It Says”, https://www.aerotime.aero/24027-airbus-slapped-with-10-tariffs-industry-to-lose-more-it-says
Summary of the US – Upland Cotton, DS267, https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/1pagesum_e/ds267sum_e.pdf
US holds off on threatened tariff hike in EU Airbus fight, https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53756201
WTO, WTO Analytical Index: SCM Agreement – Article 7 (Jurisprudence), https://www.wto.org/english/res_e/publications_e/ai17_e/subsidies_art7_jur.pdf
Others
Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, G.A. Res. 56/83, Annex, Uar.N. GAOR, 56th Sess., U.N. Doc. T A/RES/56/83
Office of the United States Trade Representative, Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 124, Annex I.
UNGA, Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, A/RES/2625 (XXV), 24 October 1970, https://unispal.un.org/DPA/DPR/unispal.nsf/0/25A1C8E35B23161C852570C4006E50AB
US Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, “Competing Economies: America, Europe, and the Pacific Rim”, OTA-ITE-498, Washington DC: US Government Printing Office, 1991.
Published
2021-04-05
How to Cite
MAHAWIRA NAWAGANI, Ida Bagus; AMALIA, Prita; NOVIANTY MUCHTAR, Helitha.
Countermeasures under the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures: Between the Aircraft Manufacturing Industry and Society.
Udayana Journal of Law and Culture, [S.l.], v. 5, n. 1, p. 72-95, apr. 2021.
ISSN 2549-0680.
Available at: <https://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/ujlc/article/view/68707>. Date accessed: 21 nov. 2024.
doi: https://doi.org/10.24843/UJLC.2021.v05.i01.p05.
Issue
Section
Articles
