Publication Ethics & Statement

Introduction

All research activities must respect fundamental ethics principles. Ethics is an integral part of research from beginning to end, and ethical compliance is seen as pivotal to achieve real research excellence. Ethical research conduct implies the application of fundamental ethical principles and legislation to scientific research in all possible domains of research.

Generate Digital Plublising (GDP) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. Authors who submit papers to GDP attest that their work is original and unpublished, and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. In addition, authors confirm that their paper is their own; that it has not been copied or plagiarized, in whole or in part, from other works; and that they have disclosed actual or potential conflicts of interest with their work or partial benefits associated with it.

Duties for Editors

Publication Decisions
The editors of Law and Judicial Review (LJR) 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
An editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy or institutional affiliation of the authors.

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 adviers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. 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 (s)
The editors, together with the publisher(s), 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 for Authors

Reporting standards
Authors 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. 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.

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 similarity 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 Publication
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 behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment 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. 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 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.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate 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.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict 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. 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.

Duties for 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.

Acknowledgement 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.

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

This policy outlines the appropriate use of artificial intelligence (AI) by authors, editorial teams, and peer reviewers when preparing or reviewing manuscripts submitted to the Law and Judicial Review (LJR).

General Principles
Authors and peer reviewers remain fully responsible and accountable for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical standards of their work. AI tools must be used responsibly, transparently, and ethically, and are intended to support human intellectual contribution, scholarly judgment, and authorship rather than replace them.

Permitted and Non-Permitted Uses

• Non-permitted use. The use of generative AI tools to create, draft, or generate new scholarly content (e.g., abstracts, literature reviews, theoretical arguments, data, results, or conclusions) is not permitted. Generative AI may not be used to fabricate, manipulate, or report research data, nor to support factual or evidential claims.
• Permitted use. Generative AI tools may be used solely for copy-editing purposes, such as improving language clarity, grammar, structure, or formatting of an author’s own original work, provided that the intellectual content remains unchanged. Standard non-generative tools for spelling and grammar correction are not subject to this policy.

AI tools cannot be credited as authors, in line with COPE guidelines.

Disclosure of AI Use
Any permitted use of generative AI tools must be clearly and transparently disclosed by authors in an appropriate section of the manuscript (e.g., Acknowledgements or Author Statement), including the name and version of the tool used and its purpose. Failure to disclose AI use may result in editorial action, including rejection or post-publication correction.
Example: “The authors declare that generative AI tools were used solely for language editing and grammatical improvement. The authors remain fully responsible for the content of this manuscript.”

AI Use in Peer Review and Editorial Processes
Manuscripts and review materials submitted to LJR must not be uploaded to generative AI tools due to confidentiality and data protection concerns. Editorial decisions and peer review evaluations must be conducted entirely by humans. Reviewers may use AI tools only for language editing of their review reports, with full responsibility for accuracy and transparent disclosure to the editorial team.

LJR reserves the right to assess the appropriateness of AI usage in submitted manuscripts and to take necessary action in accordance with publication ethics.

Research Ethics Statement 

Authors are required to provide a Research Ethics Statement as part of their manuscript submission. Please briefly explain the ethical considerations relevant to your study and indicate whether ethical approval was obtained from your institution or an independent ethics committee. If ethical approval was granted, please provide the name of the approving institution or committee, the approval/reference number (if applicable), and the date of approval.

LJR recognizes that formal ethical approval may not be required or available at all institutions or for all types of research. In such cases, authors should clearly explain why ethical approval was not required and describe the measures taken to ensure that the research was conducted ethically and in accordance with applicable institutional and international ethical standards.

For studies involving human participants, authors should also confirm that informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection. Where applicable, authors should indicate how participant confidentiality, anonymity, and data privacy were protected throughout the research process.

For manuscripts that do not present or directly draw upon empirical research, authors should include the following statement:

Research Ethics Statement: Ethical approval was not required because this manuscript does not present or directly draw upon data or findings from empirical research.

For manuscripts that are based on empirical research, the Research Ethics Statement should address the following:

• The ethical principles and procedures applied during the research.
• Whether formal ethical approval was obtained. If so, specify the approving institution or ethics committee, the approval/reference number (if available), and the approval date.
• If ethical approval was not required, provide a clear explanation of why this was the case.
• Confirmation that informed consent was obtained from participants, where applicable.
• A brief description of the measures taken to ensure participant confidentiality and data protection, where applicable.

Failure to provide an appropriate Research Ethics Statement may delay the editorial and peer-review process.