Publication Ethics

The Journal of Legal Society adheres to the ethical standards for publication as outlined in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices. These standards cover policies on authorship and contributions, procedures for handling alleged misconduct, handling complaints and appeals, handling conflicts of interest/competing interests, policies on data and reproducibility, ethical oversight, intellectual property rights, journal management, peer review processes, and post-publication discussion and correction.

Authorship and Contribution

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Plagiarism

This journal only accepts manuscripts that have not been previously published or are under consideration for publication elsewhere. All manuscripts submitted to this journal will undergo a similarity check to identify any indications of plagiarism. The editorial board is responsible for following up on any indications of plagiarism reported by authors.

Peer Review Policy

This journal implements a peer review policy as a means of ensuring the quality of publications in this journal. The peer review process consists of initial review, double-blind review, and editorial decision.

• Initial Review: The editor evaluates submitted manuscripts to determine whether they are suitable for the journal. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable for this journal will be promptly returned to the author.
• Peer Review: Submitted manuscripts that pass initial review will undergo double-blind peer review, where both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. A minimum of two reviewers will be assigned to evaluate and provide recommendations for the manuscript. In appointing reviewers, the editor is responsible for avoiding conflicts of interest during the review process.
• Decision: The editor makes the final decision on acceptance of the manuscript based on the comments and recommendations of the reviewers.

Duties of Editors, Reviewers, and Authors

The following statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the process of publishing an article in this journal: editors, reviewers, and authors.

Editor's Duties

• Decisions about publication of articles: The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and complies with legal requirements regarding copyright and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editorial board members or reviewers in making this final decision.
• Fairness; Manuscripts will be evaluated solely on their intellectual merit without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, or citizenship of the authors.
• Confidentiality; The editor, members of the editorial board, and all editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher.
• Disclosure and conflict of interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used by anyone who has had a view of the manuscript (while handling it) in their own research without the express written consent of the author.

Reviewer Duties

• Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer review assists the editor and editorial board in making editorial decisions, while the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
• Promptness: Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review an assigned manuscript or unable to provide a prompt review should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.
• Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to, or discussed with, others except as authorized by the editor. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
• Standard of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. No personal criticism of the author should be included. Reviewers should present their views clearly with supporting arguments.
• Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.

Duties of Authors

• Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.
• Data access and retention: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
• Originality and plagiarism: Authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others this must be appropriately cited or quoted.
• Multiple and concurrent publications: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
• Acknowledgement of sources: Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
• Authorship of the paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
• Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
• Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.