Publication malpractice statement

The COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) sets out ethical standards applicable to research publications for consideration by editors, publishers, reviewers and authors.

The guidelines on transparency and best practice in research papers developed by the COPE (Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing) have been implemented by the Editorial Board of the “Teka Komisji Prawniczej PAN Oddział w Lublinie”. All parties involved in the publication process: the author, the editor, the reviewer and the publisher are obligated to adhere to the ethical standards in publications. 

Duties of Authors

Data Access and Retention

The author should keep detailed records of all the source data for his or her publication, and he or she may be asked to provide access to those data, so that they can be used in the publishing process.

 

Originality and Plagiarism

The author should confirm that the work submitted for publication is original. All cited content should be quoted in the proper manner. Plagiarism shall be treated as unethical and unacceptable conduct.

 

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

The author should confirm that the work submitted for publication has not been published and is not subject to the verification/evaluation process in any other publishing company. Submitting the same publication to more than one journal is unethical and unacceptable.

 

Acknowledgement of Sources

The author should quote the publications which had an influence on his or her work in the proper manner. Information obtained privately cannot be used without the explicit written consent of the author.

 

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be restricted to those persons who participated significantly in the creation, formulation and interpretation of a work. The author is obliged to indicate all co-authors, who contributed to the publication, and to obtain their consent to publication.

 

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

The author should disclose all information on the sources of financing for the publication, as well as the contributions of scholarly and research institutions, associations and other entities, and should report all potential conflicts of interest.

 

Fundamental errors in published works

The author should immediately notify the Editor-in-chief if he or she notices significant errors in his or her publication. An erratum slip, appendix, correction or withdrawal of publication should be published in cooperation with the Editor-in-chief and the publisher.

 

Duties of the Editorial Board

Publication decision

The Editor-in-chief shall be accountable for all materials published in the journal “Teka Komisji Prawniczej PAN Oddział w Lublinie”. The decision to accept or reject a given scholarly work shall be based on its importance, originality, clarity, as well as the relevance of the research and its reference to the subject matter of the journal.

 

Fair play

Articles shall be assessed based on their quality and importance to the scholarly journal, without regard to the origin of the author of the work, his or her nationality, ethnicity, political views, sex, race or faith.

 

Confidentiality

The Editorial Board of the journal is obliged to keep confidential all information regarding the work obtained at any stage of the publication process, excluding the information revealed by the scholarly journal.

 

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Information obtained during the publication process cannot be used by members of the Editorial Board or reviewers without the explicit written consent of the author.

 

Complaints and appeals

A complaint against the journal the Editorial Team should be in writing: e-mail or traditional form (see: Contact). The subject of the complaint may be, inter alia, the infringement of the interests of the complaining party or lack of response in the matter on the part of the Editorial Team. The complaining party should receive written information within one 1 month.

 

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

The Editorial Board shall undertake all relevant actions in the event of a suspicion or allegation of misconduct being raised, in relation to both published and unpublished works.

 

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decision

A reviewer shall support the Editor-in-chief in making editorial decisions in the publication process.

 

Promptness

The reviewer should agree to review only those works for which he or she has the relevant expertise to allow him or her to present a considered opinion within a given time.

 

Confidentiality

The reviewer shall be obliged to respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and not to disclose any details concerning the work or the review.

 

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be an objective and constructive assessment of the reviewed work. The reviewers’ comments should not contain any offensive or libelous remarks.

 

Acknowledgement of Source

Reviewers should identify any published works that were not cited by the author. Any similarity to works of other authors should be reported to the Editor-in-chief.

 

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Information obtained in the process of reviewing a scholarly work cannot be used for the reviewer’s own benefit. Reviewers are obliged to notify the Editor-in-chief of all possible conflicts of interest (a reviewer cannot remain in a business relation or close personal relations with the author of the reviewed work, and more importantly, he or she cannot be related to the author).

 

Duties of Publisher

Association of Alumni and Friends of the Faculty of Law of the Catholic University of Lublin as the Publisher of academic journals, to ensure the highest quality of its publications and to prevent unfair publication practices (plagiarism, autoplagiarism, ghost-writing, guest authorship or courtesy authorship) applies the principles of publication ethics which are in compliance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): 1) submitted publications are checked using CrossRef – Similarity Check, the purpose of which is to prevent plagiarism; 2) there is in use the Open Journal Systems (OJS) – a platform for managing the publishing process and for publishing journals online, that provides mechanisms that make it possible to hold a discussion between the author and the editor and between the editor and reviewers; revise, correct or withdraw papers after their publication; 3) in the event that unfair research practices are detected, the Publisher encourages to use the solution map, available in the form of COPE flowcharts
(https://publicationethics.org/resources/translated-resources/polish-all-flowcharts).