Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement
- Ethical Mission Statement
- Editorial Responsibilities
- Author Responsibilities
- Reviewer Responsibilities
- Ethical Publishing
Ethical Mission Statement
Review of law sciences is dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters, errors, and retractions. The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the important responsibilities of the editors of the Journal, comprising the Editor-in-Chief, Senior Editor, Book Review Editor, Editorial Board, and other editorial staff affiliated with Review of law sciences.
Any kind of unethical behavior is not acceptable, and Review of law sciences does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors submitting articles to Review of law sciences affirm that manuscript contents are original and contain no fraudulent data. Furthermore, they warrant that their article has neither been published elsewhere in any language fully or partly, nor is it under review for publication anywhere else.
The following duties outlined for editors, authors, and reviewers are based on the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. Editors, authors, and reviewers will also adhere to the Review of law sciences Policies and Submission Guidelines.
- Publication Decisions: The Editor-in-Chief has complete responsibility to accept, reject, or request modifications to any submitted manuscript. S/he shall only do so in a fair and an impartial manner.
- Fair Play: The editors shall not use prejudice or bias of any kind against any author during the review process.
- Conflict of Interest: The editors shall not have any conflict of interest with respect to the article under consideration.
- Anonymity: Anonymity of reviewers as well as the author shall be maintained during the review process.
- Errors in Published Works: When an error is detected, the editors shall promote publication of correction or retraction.
- Certainty of Originality: Editors must make every effort to be reasonably certain that each manuscript is evaluated for originality, including but not limited to making use of at least two reviewers through the double-blind peer review process.
- Reporting Standards: Authors shall present an accurate account of their original research as well as an objective discussion of its significance. All authors shall have significantly contributed to the body of research and literature.
- Originality: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work.
- References and Sources: Authors shall fully annotate all sources of data used in the research and cite publications, adhering to the Journal’s Submission Guidelines. All citations must be real and authentic.
- Peer Review: Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process.
- Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Authors shall not submit the same manuscript to more than one publication concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one publication.
- Authorship of the Paper: Authorship shall be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. Authors may use acknowledgements to recognize those who have made other contributions to the manuscript. Authors must also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and the inclusion of their names as co-authors.
- Disclosure of Financial Support: Sources of financial support, if any, must be clearly disclosed.
- Errors in Published Works: All authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes, and any error or inaccuracy in submitted manuscripts must be reported to the Editor-in-Chief.
- Standard of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts shall be objective and the reviewers shall express their views clearly with supporting arguments to the editors through the double-blind peer review process.
- Conflict of Interest: Reviewers shall not have any conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors, and/or the research funders. Reviewers shall not accept for review any manuscript for which there is a potential conflict of interest, and reviewers shall report to the Editor-in-Chief any issue that may result in a conflict of interest.
- Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors shall be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. Manuscripts shall be retained by reviewers for the purpose of review for the publication consideration in the Review of law sciences> and shall not be retained or used for any other purpose.
- Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should point out relevant published work that is not yet cited. Reviewers must ensure that authors have fully referenced and cited all relevant sources of information used in their research.
- Promptness: In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible to complete a thorough and prompt review of the manuscript within the stipulated time (typically 14-21 days), then this information must be communicated to the editors so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.
- Safeguarding ethics: The monitoring and safeguarding of publishing ethics will be maintained by the editors of the Review of law sciences.
- Retracting articles: Review of law sciences is always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies as appropriate and when needed in accordance with Review of law sciences ethical guidelines.
- Integrity of the academic record: The editors of Review of law sciences shall maintain the highest levels of intellectual and ethical standards, without the interference of business needs.
- No plagiarism, no fraudulent data: Review of law sciences is committed to only publishing manuscripts that are free from any plagiarism and that contain no fraudulent data. Unethical publication practices are not tolerated by the Review of law sciences.