Editor’s Publisher Ethics

Editorial ethics of the online academic journal «Bulletin of the Institute of Law of the Bashkir State University»
Editorial ethics of the online academic journal «Bulletin of the Institute of Law of the Bashkir State University» is a code of rules for authors, editors, reviewers publishers, distributors and readers. It’s a warranty of non-infringement upon intellectual property rights, high level of publications and it prevents from violation of legal standards and conflicts of interests. The ethic policy of this journal is based on recomendations from international Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), Declaration of the Association of Scientific Editors and Publishers and the valuable experience of reputable international journals and publishers.
Key terms used in the given provision:
The Editor-in-Chief is a person who heads the Editorial Board and makes final decisions concerning production and publication of the Journal, gets in touch with the authors and readers of the research works.
The Author is a person or a group of persons (group of authors) who produce a manuscript that contains the results of their scientific research.
The Reviewer is an expert providing scientific evaluation of authors’ works in order to consider their publishing.
The Reader is a person who has read the published materials.
Plagiarism is a wrongful appropriation of another author’s scientific or artistic work, ideas, discoveries or inventions. Plagiarism may be a violation of copyright law and patent law and, as such, can entail legal liability.
The Code of Conduct for Editorial Board
The Editorial Board is fully responsible for publishing copyrighted work that entails the need to observe the following fundamental principles:
– editors accept a manuscript in case it conforms to internationally accepted scientific and publication ethical guidelines. The manuscript may be rejected for the following reasons: inappropriate topic for journal, poor scientific quality, essential contradiction to ethical principles of the Journal, plagiarism).
– the editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors;
–– the editor does not give any preferences to the authors, to their social status, academic degree and other circumstances irrelevant to to the scientific significance of the article;
– unpublished data received from a submitted manuscript must not be used by editor or editorial board members for their personal use without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the scientific editing, with possible benefits are kept confidential and not used for the purpose of personal gain;
– the editor can make no amendments to the text of the article that may affect on its content and meaning, it is possible only with the author's consent;
– the editor respects the author and his manuscript, supports the creative and scientific search of the author, get in contact with the author friendly and properly;
– the editorial board should not ignore claims concerning submitted manuscripts or published papers and in case of a conflict situation they take all the necessary measures to restore the violated rights;
– the editor chooses the reviewers out of the most competent specialists, if it is necessary he may change the reviewer;
– the editor should keep the working process in secrecy, and should not disclose the working process on the article and its content without the written consent of the author.
The Code of Conduct for Reviewers
The reviewer carries out a scientific examination of copyrighted materials as a result his opinion should be neutral and impartial, he has to observe the following principles:
– a manuscript received for peer review must be treated as a confidential document. This work could not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the Editor;
– the reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Reviewers should clearly express their opinions;
– unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts should not be used by the reviewer for personal purposes;
– the reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment in case he is not enough competent to assess the manuscript, or if he has a biased opinion (for ex.:a conflict of interests with the author or organization, that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript), in this case he should inform the editor about excluding him from the review process.
The Code of Conduct for Authors
An author (group of authors) is responsible for the novelty and validity of scientific research, which implies adhering to the following principles:
– an author should represent the manuscript that has never been published before. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour.
– an author should ensure only original manuscript. Every borrowed fragment or statement must be accompanied by a mandatory reference to the author and the original source. Excessive borrowing and any form of plagiarism including non-documented citations, paraphrasing or appropriating another person’s research results are non-ethical and unacceptable;
– authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. It is not acceptable to list persons who did not take part in the research. The final version of the article should be confirmed by all co-authors;
– an author should ensure that the research results are completely original; falsified statements are unacceptable;
– if the author finds significant errors or inaccuracies in the manuscript before or after its publication, he should immediately inform the Editorial Board;
- the authors should disclose any financial or any other significant conflict of interest that may be interpreted as affecting the results or interpretation of the manuscript. All sources of financial support should be disclosed.