ISSN: 2605-5244

Code of Ethics

The Code of Ethics of the Italian-Spanish Journal of Procedure Law uses as a reference the guidelines set out by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to provide an ethical approach to scientific work. The Editorial Board of the Journal shares the recommendations made by COPE to combat lack of due diligence and to ensure ethical good practices in the publication process. All involved in this process, i.e. Editorial Board, authors and reviewers, must be informed and shared the following ethical principles:

Duties of the Editorial Board
  1. Decision about publication
    The Editorial Board is responsible for making the decision to publish papers submitted for publication to the Journal. After having previously examined whether it is appropriate, the Editorial Board submits the paper to a double-blind peer-review proceeding. In this process, the Editorial Board will comply with the strategies and editorial focus of the Journal. It is also bound by the relevant applicable laws on intellectual property rights, defamation and plagiarism.
  2. Equity and non-discrimination
    The Editorial Board is only entitled to make decisions on the basis of scientific, significance and originality criteria without discrimination on grounds of sex, race, gender, religion, ethnic origin, citizenship, sexual orientation, gender identity, age or political orientation of authors.
  3. Confidentiality, conflicts of interests and prohibition of use or dissemination
    The Editorial Board is not allowed to disseminate information about the papers proposed for publication to persons different from the author/s, reviewers, editor or printer. Members of the Editorial Board are not allowed to use the content of not yet published papers for their own research without prior written consent by the author.
    The Journal uses a double-blind review proceeding to ensure the confidentiality of the publication process, i.e. both the author and reviewers’ identities are concealed from the author, and vice versa, throughout the review process. The Editorial Board members identify the reviewers in view of their expertise to provide an informed assessment of the paper for publication.
Duties of the authors
  1. Scientific originality
    The author must ensure that the submitted paper for publication has not been yet published, it is scientifically original and has not been simultaneously sent to other journals, volumes or period publications without the express consent of the Editorial Board. If the paper is later published in other journals or volumes, the Italian-Spanish Journal of Procedure Law must be informed and provide their consent to it even if the latter publication makes specific reference to its previous publication in the Journal. It is also mandatory for the author to make adequate citation according to the editorial criteria of the Journal, paying particular attention to adequate reference to others’ papers and words. In general, authors are strictly required to adhere to the editorial rules of the Journal.
  2. Revision of the paper
    The Editorial Board is entitled to request the author to make the changes in the paper that are considered appropriate, in particular after the double-blind peer-review proceeding. Whether appropriate, the Editorial Board may inform the author about the comments made by the anonymous reviewers. The author can make observations or objections to these comments being the Editorial Board responsible for making a final decision.
    The Editorial Board is entitled to make editorial changes to an accepted paper for publication to ensure the compliance with the form criteria of the Journal.
  3. Ownership of the paper
    Ownership of the paper must be clearly indicated. All persons that have made a significant contribution to the paper should be specifically mentioned as co-authors. In this case, the contribution of each co-author should be clearly indicated. All those that have otherwise contributed to the paper should also be recognized.
  4. Conflicts of interests
    The author must not have incurred in any conflict of interests affecting the research outcome, the ideas put forward or the proposed interpretations. The author must indicate any research funding from which the paper has benefitted.
  5. Correction of mistakes
    If the author identifies a mistake or non-accuracy on the paper, (s)he is expected to immediately inform the Journal and provide all relevant data to make the correction in the inferior part or appendix of the paper. The author has also to cooperate with the editor during the proof correction’s period, including the cases in which the correction is requested by the Editorial Board unless otherwise agreed upon.
Duties of reviewers
  1. Participation in the editorial decision
    Peer review is a process to confirm the scientific quality of the papers submitted for publication. It also helps the author to improve his/her contribution.
  2. Deadlines’ compliance
    The reviewer is entitled to reject the appointment in those cases in which (s)he does not consider the paper within his or her area of expertise or is not able to provide an assessment within the allocated deadline. The reviewer must inform the Editorial Board as soon as possible to be withdraw from the peer-review process.
  3. Correctness and impartiality
    Peer review must be undertaken in a correct and impartial manner. The reviewer is requested to justify his or her assessment of the paper in an appropriate and documented manner. Any personal judgment will be considered inappropriate. It is strictly forbidden to make personal comments on the author. Comments have to be adequately written and cannot be framed as ideological criticism or include cultural prejudices of a personal nature. Each comment or criticism should be accompanied by an adequate citation or documentation supporting it.
  4. References
    The reviewer is entitled to highlight references that are substantial but have not been taken into consideration in the paper. The reviewer is expected to provide information on any similarity of the paper with others of his or her knowledge.
  5. Conflicts of interests and dissemination
    Papers under review are confidential. They cannot be shared with anyone unless specifically authorized by the Editorial Board. The information gathered during the peer-review process must be considered reliable and confidential. It cannot be used for own benefit.
    The reviewer is obliged to reject the review of papers where there is a conflict of interest due to his or her relationship of either collaboration or concurrence with the author –in principle unknown due to the blind process but inferred from the paper– and/or connections with the author or entities involved in the paper.