THE AIM AND THE CHARACTER OF PUBLICATION ETHICS STANDARDS

1. The aim of the principles of publication ethics adopted by the “Archiwum Filozofii Prawa i Filozofii Społecznej”, the journal of the Polish section of IVR, is to ensure that published papers represent the highest standards of scientific integrity and to foster an honest and open scientific discussion which respects the diversity of views and research paradigms.

2. The principles of publication ethics adopted by our journal are in line with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Regarding the conflict of interests, they are also in line with the recommendations of the Committee on Legal Sciences of the Polish Academy of Sciences (Komitet Nauk Prawnych PAN) concerning the disclosure of conflict of interest in scientific legal publications.

3. The principles of publication ethics are applied by the Editorial Board and the Editorial Committee. The editors ensure that the standards are also obeyed by authors, reviewers and other people involved in publication process.

4. With respect to matters not covered by these principles, the Editorial Board and the Editorial Committee adhere to the COPE standards. Doubts are resolved in regards to the aim and the character of the principles of publication ethics.

5. All questions or information regarding the application of these standards can be sent to the Editorial Board at: archiwum@ivr.org.pl.
   

DUTIES OF THE MEMBERS OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD
AND THE EDITORIAL COMMITTEE

6. Members of the Editorial Board (editors) and the Editorial Committee are determined to apply the highest standards of publication ethics and require other people, especially authors and reviewers, to respect them, . Each case of scientific misconduct is documented, and information about it is reported to relevant entities in accordance with these principles and legal requirements.

7. All decisions on the submitted papers are made through procedures which are transparent to authors, reviewers, and other interested parties.

8. Editors treat all authors equally, regardless of their academic degree or title, age, gender, affiliation and any other characteristics, including their race, nationality, citizenship, ethnicity, worldview, or disabilities.

9. Editors base their decisions on the substantive value of the text, including originality of the research and presented argumentation, as well as on its relevance from the perspective of the journal’s scope. These criteria are evaluated according to the result of the review process conducted in line with the procedures referred to in point 7.

10. Members of the Editorial Board refrain from using the submitted materials in any way that was not agreed upon with the author. The results of the research presented in a submitted paper can only be used after the paper has been published.

11. All information about the author is classified and is subject to disclosure only to the extent and in the manner necessary for publication purposes, in accordance with the procedures referred to in point 7 and regulations on the protection of personal data.

12. Members of the Editorial Board and of the Editorial Committee are required to know and obey the current legal framework regarding copyright, data protection, and the protection of personal rights.

13. Members of the Editorial Board and of the Editorial Committee are particularly determined to eliminate all cases of plagiarism, ghost authorship and guest authorship, in accordance with points 26-32 of these standards.

14. If the Editorial Boards receives a complaint about the infringement of the principles of publication ethics, which consist specific and probable allegations, the editors ask the author to provide an explanation. If the author fails to respond or their response raises reasonable doubts, the complaint is reported to the institution employing or affiliating the author.

DUTIES OF AUTHORS

15. The authors are required to act honestly and to observe other principles of publication ethics, both during the preparation of the submitted text and cooperation with the editors during the procedures referred to in point 7.

16. Authors are required to submit only those papers which are original and scientifically reliable. It is unacceptable to make false statements knowingly, to falsify the results or to manipulate the data.

17. It is considered dishonest by the journal to submit texts which have been published or submitted in another journal, monograph or collective work. It is also considered dishonest to submit the text elsewhere after the text has been submitted to our journal.

18. It is considered dishonest to submit the text which has been rejected from publication in another journal, monograph or collective work without informing the Editorial Board about this fact. The author is required to provide information on the reasons for the rejection.

19. Points 17 and 18 also apply to the submission of texts in languages other than the one in which the paper was originally submitted to and published or rejected in another journal, monograph or collective work.However, the author can offer the editors a submission of a new language version of the previously published text. The paper can be submitted if the Editorial Board expresses its interest in the text. In this regard, the Editorial Board takes into account mainly the perspectives of disseminating the results abroad.

20. The author is required to honestly and reliably quote and attribute the sources.The literature should represent the current state of knowledge in the field of research conducted by the author. It is considered dishonest both to deliberately omit certain sources and to provide notes to sources which the author did not use.

21. If the paper contains the results of the research which involve the use of personal data, the author is either required to ensure the proper anonymization of the data in line with the used methodology or obtain the consent of the people whose data has been used.

22. The author is required to reveal all the sources of funding for their research and/or other support received while preparing the text, in line with the standards regarding the conflict of interest, ghost authorship and guest authorship referred to in points 23-28.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

23. If a text is submitted by a member of the Editorial Board or a person who is in such a relationship with a member of the Editorial Board that a conflict of interest might emerge (e.g. a family member or other person with close personal ties to the author), the activities preceding the review process and the review process itself are carried out by a member of the Editorial Board who is not the author of the text and who is not in the conflict of interest. The names of the reviewers are not revealed to the member of the Editorial Board excluded from the review process.

24. A conflict of interest may arise in case of a relationship between the author of the text and a public or private entity that is directly interested in a specific interpretation of the law or benefits from it. The Editorial Board should be informed about the relationship. The Editorial Board assesses whether the relationship could affect the author’s compliance with the principles of publication ethics.

25. The relationship referred to in point 24 may include: a) performing a work for a given entity (based on contracts of various types), paid representation of the entity as a proxy, or acting on behalf of the entity as an expert – in the course of work on the submitted text or in the last 3 years, especially when the text is a repetition or a modified version of a pleading or an opinion prepared for a given entity; b) participating in issuing a decision of a court or other authority, which is afterwards analyzed in the submitted text; c) using the funds of a given entity to conduct research reported in the submitted text or other research (which has been carried out in the last 3 years or an ongoing one), particularly to cover the costs of publishing the results of the research.

GHOST AUTHORSHIP AND GUEST AUTHORSHIP

26. The following actions are considered to be dishonest and are unacceptable: a) ghost authorship, i.e. an omission in the list of authors of a person who participated in the creation of the text; b) guest authorship, i.e. including a person who had no influence on the creation of the text in the list of authors.

27. To prevent ghost authorship, the authors submitting the text are required to reveal all people and institutions which supported them while preparing the paper. In particular, it is unacceptable to omit the authorship of people who contributed to the creation of the text.

28. To prevent guest authorship, the authors submitting the text are required to include among the authors only the people who significantly contributed to the concept, assumptions, methodology, research, and writing of the paper. If the text was prepared by several authors, each of them is required to provide a statement on their contribution.

29. In case of a suspected ghost authorship and/or guest authorship, the Editorial Board is required to verify the case and the author is expected to provide explanation. If a ghost authorship and/or guest authorship is proven, the text is rejected and the Editorial Board informs the institution employing or affiliating the author.

PLAGIARISM AND SELF-PLAGIARISM

30. Plagiarism of any kind is considered to be a particularly blatant manifestation of dishonesty. This includes any appropriation of the authorship of a text, statements, research results, or data.

31. In the event of a suspected plagiarism, the Editorial Board is required to verify the case and the author is expected to provide an explanation. If plagiarism is proven, the text is rejected and the Editorial Board informs the institution employing or affiliating the author.

32. It is also unacceptable to reuse fragments of author’s previous works in the submitted text unless an explicit attribution is provided and such a reuse is not significant enough to deem the text unoriginal and self-plagiarised.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

33. The reviewers are obliged to remain impartial and assess only the substantive value of the text. The consistency with the journal’s aim and scope, language proficiency, and compliance with editorial standards can also be evaluated.

34. If a reviewed paper falls outside the reviewer’s area of expertise, they are obliged to inform the Editorial Board about this fact immediately.

35. The reviewers cannot be affiliated with the same institution as the author and cannot be in a conflict of interest. In case of a detected conflict of interest – involving the discovery of the author`s identity – the reviewer is obliged to inform the Editorial Board immediately.

36. The reviewers are required to inform the Editorial Board about any suspected scientific dishonesty to which these principles refer and about any other violation of principles of publication ethics.

37. The reviewers are required to treat the reviewed paper as confidential and should refrain from using the text in their own research until it is published. It is also forbidden to grant other people access to the reviewed text.

38. The reviewers are obliged to prepare the reviews within the deadline and in line with the procedures referred to in point 7. If the review cannot be prepared in time, the reviewer should immediately inform the Editorial Board.

POST-PUBLICATION PROCEDURES

39. If the Editorial Board learns after the text has been published that during the procedures referred to in point 7 serious violations of the principles of publication ethics occurred, it notifies the scientific institution employing or affiliating the author about the situation, retracts the text from open access and publishes information on the discovered infringement inits place.

40. If the author discovers a fundamental error in an already published text, they should inform the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board verifies the case and considers possible actions.