Code of Ethics
Law, Identity and Values – hereinafter referred to as the Journal – fully adheres to the core practises of COPE and makes an unquestionable effort to live up to the standard adopted by COPE. The Journal functions on the principles of morality and cooperation, serving the development of academic research on law.
The Journal follows a double-blind review process. Each contributing party to the publishing process – author(s), translator(s), editor(s), peer reviewers, and the publisher – shall accept the standards relevant to the expected moral behaviour.
The Journal’s organisational structure
The Journal has an Editor-in-chief, who is supported by an editorial team. This team currently consists of four editors. The editors’ tasks regarding the peer review process are detailed below. Besides the editorial team, there is an eight-member editorial board. These members are requested by the Editor-in-chief for a period of three years. The supportive functions of the editorial board include:
- reading the manuscripts submitted or the articles published and making relevant suggestions,
- recommending our Journal to authors for publication,
- recommending different authors to the Journal’s editors to request them to be published in the Journal,
- promoting our Journal in academic events.
The Journal exclusively publishes manuscripts that
- are written in English,
- have not been submitted to other journals for publication, and
- have not been published in other journals.
Prior publication in any language other than English is permitted.
Note: The author may upload her/his manuscript before or simultaneously while submitting to the Journal as a preprint to a website that contains discussion papers to enhance the quality of research. This is not considered an obstacle to publishing the ultimate version of the research in the Journal.
The editor always evaluates the intellectual content of manuscripts regardless of the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, nationality or political views. The editors’ decisions shall be based on professional and scientific aspects.
The editorial team and the editorial board, as well as peer reviewers treat submitted manuscripts as confidential information. They do not provide any information related to the manuscripts to unauthorised persons. Exceptions to this rule are the main author, the peer reviewers, other editorial consultants, and the publisher.
Disclosure and conflict of interest
The editor is not allowed to use the unpublished material of the submitted manuscript for his own research without the author’s prior written consent.
Obligations of authors
Guidelines for disclosure: Authors presenting original research should provide an accurate report of the work performed. The drawing of interpretations and conclusions can only be based on facts or unbiased and logical evidence. The background data of the study should be accurately presented. The study should provide sufficient details and references so that the processes described can be replicated by others. False or intentionally inaccurate claims are considered as unethical and unacceptable behaviour.
Revoking: If authors wish to revoke or correct any part of the study, they must contact one of the editors, who will then initiate the general peer-reviewing process for the revised parts. The publisher and editors support correcting, clarifying, retracting or explaining the content of the study in all cases.
Fees and remuneration: The submission of the manuscript and any amendments or supplements thereto shall be free of charge. The author is not remunerated for publication.
Originality and plagiarism: The authors shall guarantee that the study is their own original intellectual work, and if they used others’ works and/or expressions, they are appropriately and professionally cited. The publisher and editors will take the necessary steps if a manuscript is suspected of plagiarism. Under no circumstances must the publisher or editors associate themselves with plagiarist conduct, and they do not permit any form of plagiarism. If a statement for plagiarism is sent to the publisher or editors in connection with any of the studies, the editors scrutinise the circumstances and take the necessary steps. In case of suspected plagiarism, the editor enquires with the corresponding author and simultaneously gets in touch with the submitting author. If the latter does not respond within the time frame determined by the editor, he/she contacts the institution of the author with the request to investigate. Until all the questions are clarified, the Journal does not proceed with moving the manuscript forward.
Multiple, redundant or simultaneous publishing: It is not a good practise to have the manuscript of the same research published in various independent publications or journals. The submission of the same manuscript to different journals is deemed unethical and unacceptable.
Reference to sources: The cited works must be properly referred to in all cases. The authors shall refer to all publications that have influenced their work. (For detailed information, see ‘Rules of publication.’)
Contributors to the research: Any person who contributed substantially to the concept, design, implementation or interpretation of the presented study must be included as an author. Those who contributed significantly to the study must be indicated as co-authors. However, those who were involved in certain important stages of the study/research project should be indicated as contributors. Furthermore, the main author must ensure that:
- all major co-authors are mentioned in the study,
- she/he has not nominated persons as co-authors who are not entitled to it, and
- all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the study and agreed to publish it.
Disclosure and conflict of interest: Each author is obliged to disclose any financial or other material conflicts of interest in the manuscript, which may influence its results or interpretation. All funding sources for the study/research project must be made public.
Editors will consider retracting a publication, if
- they have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of major error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error) or as a result of fabrication (e.g. of data) or falsification (e.g. image manipulation);
- it constitutes plagiarism;
- the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication);
- it contains material or data without authorisation for use;
- it involves a copyright infringement or any other serious legal issue (e.g. libel, privacy);
- it falls under unethical research;
- it has been published solely on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer-review process;
- the author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would unduly affect interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers.
In case of self-plagiarism (text recycling) of a published article, editors may consider the following steps.
They may consider publishing a correction to the article when the following apply:
- sections of the text are identical or nearly identical to a previous publication by the same author(s), but
- there is still sufficient new material in the article to justify its publication.
Editors may consider publishing a retraction of an article in the following cases:
- There is significant overlap in the text, generally excluding methods, with sections that are identical or nearly identical to a previous publication by the same author(s).
- The recycled text reports previously published data and there is insufficient new material in the article to justify its publication in light of the previous publication(s), i.e. redundant publication.
The overlap breaches copyright. In this case legal advice may be needed.