Publication ethics

The Legal Position journal is responsible for publishing Ethics based on the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors to ensure the quality of the publication.

Duties and rights of authors:

  1. The authors are responsible for the originality of the text of the scientific article, the accuracy of the facts, citations, statistics, proper names, geographical names and other information, as well as for the fact that the materials do not contain data that is not open for publication.
  2. When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, the author's obligation is to immediately notify the editor of the journal or publisher, and cooperate with the editor to reject or correct the article.
  3. Neither the editors nor the editorial board are responsible for the views, views, and content of the manuscripts published in the journal. The originality, correction of the manuscripts and errors are the sole responsibility of the individual authors.

Duties and editorial rights:

  1. The editorial board decides on the publication of submitted papers, based on the policy of the journal and based on the academic values and conclusions of the reviewers.
  2. The editor evaluates manuscripts regardless of previous merit, race, ethnic origin, gender, religion, citizenship, sexual orientation, or political philosophy of the authors.
  3. The editorial staff of the journal guarantees that personal data other than that which is publicly provided in the article will be used solely for the purpose of internal editorial tasks and will not be disseminated and transmitted to third parties.

Duties and rights of reviewers:

  1. Any manuscripts and supplementary materials received for review should be treated as confidential documents. They may not be displayed or discussed with third parties.
  2. A reviewer who is aware in advance of the lack of review time or of facts that make it impossible to review at the appointed time must notify the editor and release himself / herself from the review process.
  3. Reviews should be objective. Reviewers should clearly and reasonably express their views on conflicting points. Personal criticism of the reviewer is inadmissible.