Contemporary Legal studies Journal (CLSJ) promotes adherence to the core principles of publication ethics promulgated by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). It is ,therefore, important that all parties involved in the publication of an article including: The author(s), Editor-in-chief, reviewers, the executive director be aware of and be committed to publication ethics as clearly defined below.

When authors submit a manuscript and reviewers accept to conduct a review, it is presumed that they know and adhere to publication ethics.

 

Authors:

 

1. Submitted work is to be of original, analytical and novel character which is structured in compliance with the standards set forth in the section of Author Guideline.
2. Authors should respect the confidentiality of the entire article evaluation process and not reveal their identities to the reviewers. The original file of the article, thus, should not contain any information about the identity of the authors.
3. The author is responsible to inform the Journal with potential conflicts of interest and sponsors of the research.
4. Submission of articles taken from graduate thesis is subject to the written permission of the supervisor.
5. Some types of Research misconduct and violation of publication ethics are as follows.

 

-          Falsification: Alteration through addition, omission, or distortion of information (to include but not limited to data, citations, quotations, transcripts, archival documents) intended to deceptively promote or diminish or otherwise mislead.

-          Fabrication: Manufacture of information (to include but not limited to data, citations, quotations, transcripts, archival documents) in order to deceptively promote or diminish or otherwise mislead.

-          Discriminatory and Harassing Research Practices and Language: Differential treatment of and conduct toward an individual or group of people based on their race, color, national origin, religion, sex (including pregnancy and gender identity), age, marital and parental status, disability, sexual orientation, or genetic information.

-          Failure to Acknowledge Sources: Includes all forms of plagiarism (see below) and also intentionally or unintentionally omitting to cite irreproducible sources.

-          Plagiarism: Appropriation of another person’s words, ideas methods, results, or artwork as one’s own (i.e., without appropriate citation), which includes translation plagiarism, self-plagiarism and compression plagiarism.

-          Multiple Manuscript Submission: Submitting the same manuscript to more than one publisher, or even to more than one publication at the same publisher, without full disclosure.

-          Undisclosed Errors in Published Work: Failure to report errors discovered after publication to the publisher and/or editor.

-          Misrepresentation of Authorship: Exaggerating or understating/omitting contribution by one or more parties to a publication. (For more explanation on different types of such misrepresentation see Brill’s Publication Ethics). In order to prevent such violation, the corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors are included in and non-authors are excluded from the paper. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring the consent of all other authors of the paper and sending their consent (in the form of letter of commitment to the Editor-in-Chief)

1. Authors are responsible for accuracy of the content and cited resources and also for observance of right of publishers and authors.

 

Editor-in-chief and Editorial board:

1.  Confidentiality

The editor 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.

1. Impartiality

The content of an article should be reviewed regardless of the author(s) race, religion, ethnic and any political standpoints.

1. Editor-in-chief is not allowed to use the unpublished manuscript of author(s) except with written permission from the author.

 

Reviewers:

1. Reviewer must treat manuscript referred to them as confidential document. The manuscript must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the Editor-In-Chief.
2. Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review a submitted manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor-in-Chief and excuse him/herself from the review process.
3. A reviewer shall inform the Editor-In-Chief’s with any similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published material that he/ she has reviewed or seen before.
4. Review of papers should be based on scientific reasons and sufficient analyses in a clear and unbiased manner in order to promote the quality of papers.
5. Any information or ideas drawn from the papers in the review process should remain undisclosed and they should not be used for personal interests.
6. 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.