Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Statement
The Verdict: Journal of Law Science is deeply committed to adhering to publication ethics standards adopted from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): the COPE Core Practices and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. All parties must adhere to these publication ethics. We do not tolerate any research misconduct: fabrication/falsification, citation manipulation, plagiarism, or any unethical behavior in publishing research. In this case, if there is an allegation of misconduct, the editorial board will take action to resolve it immediately. Thus, to ensure the principles of transparency and best publishing practices, here are the duties and responsibilities of Authors, Editors, and Reviewers.

Duties of Authors
Reporting Standards
The authors of the original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective, and comprehensive, while editorial ‘opinion’ or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data access and Retention
The authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, should be prepared to provide public access, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. We will check each manuscript using a plagiarism checker to ensure the originality of the article. Furthermore, each submitted article should be accompanied by a letter of statement from the author(s) stating that the article is free from plagiarism.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications
The papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources
The authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from the conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.

Authorship and Contributor of the Paper
The authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. The maximum number of authors is five. 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 should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

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. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. The authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects.
The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed. For human subjects, the author should ensure that the work described has been carried out in accordance with The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsinki) for experiments involving humans.

Declaration of Competing Interests
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could be viewed as inappropriately influencing (bias) their work. All sources of financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article should be disclosed, as should the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. If the funding source(s) had no such involvement then this should be stated. The author must declare competing interests in the manuscript.

Image Integrity
It is not acceptable to enhance, obscure, move, remove, or introduce a specific feature within an image. Adjustments of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Manipulating images for improved clarity is accepted, but manipulation for other purposes could be seen as scientific ethical abuse and will be dealt with accordingly. Authors should comply with any specific policy for graphical images applied by the relevant journal, e.g. providing the original images as supplementary material with the article, or depositing these in a suitable repository.

Duties of Editors
Publication Decisions
Editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer review by at least two reviewers who are experts in the field. The editor in chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair Play
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The editor in chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

Confidentiality
Editors and any 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, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Editors will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the author’s explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

Management of Unethical Behavior
Editors and publisher should take rationally responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented regarding a submitted manuscript or published article. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

Duties of Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any 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.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Handling Complaints and Appeals
Verdict: Journal of Law Science welcomes appeals to editor decisions or to complaints about published content. However, you need to provide strong evidence or new data/information in response to the editor’s and reviewers’ comments or the author’s published content. If an author or reader has concerns about their reviewed manuscript or another author’s published paper, they may contact the Editor at verdict.jls@gmail.com with a detailed written description of their concern and complaints, explaining clearly the basis for an appeal and complaint. If you believe a correction (for a significant error) is necessary for your article or another author’s article, contact the journal at verdict.jls@gmail.com. Online versions of the article will be corrected (if possible), and an erratum will be published accordingly. Complaints related to the journal business process, i.e. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc will be processed according to COPE guidelines.

Data Sharing and Reproducibility Policy
Verdict: Journal of Law Science requires authors to provide a clear statement regarding the availability of data accompanying their submitted manuscripts. Authors are encouraged to deposit raw data, code, or other relevant materials in appropriate repositories or archives to ensure long-term accessibility and transparency. Detailed documentation of the data, including metadata and variable definitions, should be provided to facilitate understanding and replication of the study. Authors should also describe methods and procedures used in analyses to enable reproducibility of findings. Ethical considerations, such as obtaining consent for data sharing and protecting participant privacy, should be addressed. Exceptions or limitations to data sharing should be clearly identified, and proper citation and attribution of shared data are essential.

Ethical Oversight Policy
Verdict: Journal of Law Science maintains stringent procedures for ethical oversight to ensure the highest standards of research integrity and ethical conduct. Authors, who wish to submit a manuscript to Verdict: Journal of Law Science, are required to adhere to ethical principles throughout the research process, including obtaining informed consent from participants, ensuring confidentiality and anonymity, and disclosing any potential conflicts of interest. Our editorial board and peer reviewers meticulously review manuscripts to assess the ethical soundness of the research design, methods, and reporting. Any concerns or issues regarding ethical compliance are carefully evaluated and addressed by established guidelines and best practices.

Intellectual Property Policy
Verdict: Journal of Law Science upholds robust policies regarding intellectual property to protect the rights of authors, researchers, and contributors. The authors retain full copyright ownership of their work published in Verdict: Journal of Law Science, granting the journal a non-exclusive license to disseminate and archive their contributions. Any use, reproduction, or distribution of published content requires appropriate citation and attribution to the original source. Plagiarism, unauthorized use of copyrighted material, and other forms of academic misconduct are strictly prohibited. Verdict: Journal of Law Science respects the intellectual property rights of all parties involved and is committed to promoting responsible and ethical practices in academic publishing.

Post-publication Discussions and Corrections Policy
Verdict: Journal of Law Science allows post-publication discussions and corrections through direct communication via email. Authors, readers, and stakeholders are encouraged to reach out to the journal’s editorial team via email to provide feedback, comments, or suggestions regarding published articles. Additionally, authors are welcome to submit corrections, clarifications, or updates to published articles through email correspondence with the editorial office. The editorial team promptly reviews and addresses all communications received, ensuring transparency and accountability in the publication process. Verdict: Journal of Law Science values opening dialogue and constructive engagement to maintain the accuracy and integrity of published research in society, culture, and language studies.

Retraction, Withdrawal, & Correction Policy
Article Retraction
An article may be retracted if:

  1. There is a major scientific error that would invalidate the conclusions of the article, for example where there is clear evidence that findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error).

  2. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication).

  3. There are ethical issues such as plagiarism (appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit including those obtained through confidential review of others’ manuscripts) or inappropriate authorship.

In order to ensure that retractions are handled according to publication best practice, and in accordance with COPE retraction guidelines, Verdict: Journal of Law Science adopts the following retraction process:

  1. An article requiring potential retraction is brought to the attention of the journal editor.

  2. The journal editor should follow the step-by-step guidelines according to the COPE flowcharts (including evaluating a response from the author of the article in question).

  3. Before any action is taken, the editor’s findings should be sent to the ethics advisory board to ensure a consistent approach in accordance with industry best practices.

  4. The final decision as to whether to retract is then communicated to the author and, if necessary, any other relevant bodies, such as the author’s institution on occasion.

  5. The retraction statement is then posted online and published in the next available issue of the journal (see below for more details of this step).

Please, remember the authors retain copyright for an article, but it does not mean they automatically have the right to retract it after publication. The integrity of the published scientific record is of paramount importance and COPE’s Retraction Guidelines still apply in such cases.

Article Withdrawal
We assume that every author has understood all the publication policies of this journal. Therefore, we sincerely hope there will be no article withdrawals until a final decision is made or while the peer review process is ongoing. Each article will be processed based on the time and stages of peer review (see the peer-review process). If a withdrawal still occurs, the authors agree to the following provisions.

  1. If the author requests the withdrawal of the manuscript while the manuscript is still in the peer-reviewing process, the author will be punished by paying 50 USD per manuscript.

  2. If the withdrawal after the manuscript is accepted for publication; the author will be punished by paying 100USD per manuscript.

  3. If an article has been published as an “Article in Press” (articles that have been accepted for publication but which have not been formally published and will not have the complete volume/issue/page information) that include errors, or are discovered to be accidental duplicates of other published article (s), or are determined to violate our journal publishing ethics guidelines in the view of the editors (such as multiple submissions, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data or the like), maybe “Withdrawn” from the Verdict: Journal of Law Science website. Withdrawing means that the article content (HTML and PDF) is deleted and replaced with an HTML page and PDF simply states that the article has been withdrawn. In this case, the author will be punished by paying 90 USD per manuscript.

  4. If the author doesn’t agree to pay the penalty, the author will be blacklisted for publication in this journal about 2 years.

  5. If the author request to withdraw a manuscript, an official letter signed by the corresponding author and agency leader must be sent to the principal editor.


Article Correction:
The decision on whether a correction should be issued is made by the editors of a journal, sometimes with advice from reviewers or editorial board members. Handling editors will contact the authors of the paper concerned with a request for clarification, but the final decision about whether a correction is required and if so which type rests with the editors.

Article Removal or Replacement

  1. In an extremely limited number of cases, it may be necessary to remove a published article from our online platform. This will only happen if an article is clearly defamatory, or infringes others’ legal rights, or where the article is, or we have good reason to expect that it will be, the subject of a court order, or where the article, if acted upon, may pose a serious health risk. In such circumstances, while the metadata (i.e. title and author information) of the article will be retained, the text will be replaced with a screen indicating that the article has been removed for legal reasons.

  2. In cases where an article, if acted upon, may pose a serious health risk, the authors of the original paper may wish to retract the flawed original and replace it with a corrected version. Under such circumstances, the above procedures for retraction will be followed with the difference that the article retraction notice will contain a link to the corrected re-published article together with a history of the document.


References:
COPE DOAJ OASPA WAME. Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing — English. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12. Version 4: September 2022.