The issue of high-seas fisheries is the main threat to biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. The BBNJ Agreement, which focuses on biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, is under vigorous discussion. Subject to the “not undermine” requirement and considerations of practical interests, it is highly possible that the BBNJ Agreement may not address the issue of fisheries on the high seas. The objective of this paper is to analyze the relationship between the high-seas fisheries issue and the BBNJ Agreement for the purposes of the conservation of marine biodiversity, the unity of the marine ecosystem, and the consistency of regulations. It maintains that from the perspective of protecting the oceans, enacting legislation in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and transforming marine management mode, the issue of high-seas fisheries should be included in the BBNJ Agreement. In the future, the BBNJ agreement needs to clarify its scope of application, resolve overlapping issues through general regulations and conflict rules, clarify the methods and contents of international cooperation, and establish international law obligations for integrated ocean management.

With the advent of 5G network technology and the maturity of medical applications associated with 5G, the Internet medical service industry is gradually developing. Given the COVID-19 pandemic crisis occasionally happened in China, hospitals were taken up most of the medical resources, the Internet medical care is seen as the alternative way for patients to access medical care and treatment. With the aid of 5G, patients nowadays can seek remote medical care, diagnosis, and surgery. However, this is not without any problems. The current legal supervision system in the Internet medical service industry is still incomplete, and ought to be augmented. This essay serves to identify and evaluate the loopholes existing in the legal supervision system in the Internet medical service industry, in the hope to improve the current system and ensure the safety of patients who are seeking Internet medical services.

While China’s medical tourism industry is increasingly standardized and institutionalized, the relevant research assessing its legal risks is still absent. This paper aims to evaluate the risks of medical tourism from the legal perspective by exploring the conflict between the developing new practice and the existing legal system, summarizing the legal risks in medical tourism, and proposing measures and suggestions to mitigate such risks. The empirical research method is employed to review the legal risks in Boao Lecheng International Medical Tourism Pilot Zone, which is the pioneering project of China’s development within the medical tourism industry. These research methods include collecting the latest medical tourism policies and regulations, judicial decisions, and on-the-spot investigation of the Pilot Zone. It is found that the legal risks in medical tourism activities are mainly concentrated in the administrative, civil and litigious legal relations, and concern four major subjects which are regulators, medical operators, tourism operators and consumers. For regulators, their administrative supervision has not been well in place before and during medical tourism activities, and there remain legal gaps in regulation. In terms of the protection of consumers’ substantive rights, service providers and operators may evade their responsibilities by exploring the vacuum area during the transition from the old laws to the new ones, and the conflicting provisions exist between the special laws and general ones. Concerning the protection of consumers’ litigation rights, there are many obstacles for consumers to safeguard their interests through litigation in a foreign land. In this paper, medical tourism activities are identified among four legal subjects and involving three types of legal risks, in the hope to help improve the overall understanding of medical tourism from the legal perspective, and put forward targeted suggestions on the potential legal risks.