Ethical Principles

Author Responsibilities

Submitted articles must be original works in the field of law.

Authors must provide proper citations for all sources used during the writing of the article.

It must be stated that the submitted article has not been sent to another journal, and a Copyright Transfer Form must be completed.

Individuals who have not made an intellectual contribution to the article should not be listed as authors. Once the review process has begun, changes such as adding or removing authors or altering the order of authors are not permitted.

Authors must not submit an article that has been previously published elsewhere, is under consideration elsewhere, or submit multiple articles simultaneously.

Any conflicts of interest or shared interests related to the submitted article must be disclosed to the editors with an explanation.

During the review process, authors may be requested to provide information or raw data related to their articles and must be prepared to supply the requested materials.

Authors must notify the editor if they discover any errors in their articles during review, early view, or after online publication, and must cooperate to correct or withdraw the article if necessary.

Authors must document that they have obtained the rights to use the data in their articles, as well as any necessary permissions for research and analysis, and approval from research participants.

For studies requiring an ethics committee approval—such as experiments, surveys, scales, interviews, observations, or focus group studies—authors must state on the first/last page and in the methodology section of the article that they have obtained such approval, including the name of the ethics committee, date, and approval number. The ethics committee approval document must be submitted with the article. In case reports, authors must indicate that informed consent forms have been obtained.

Authors must provide evidence within the article that ethical principles were respected during the data collection process. The article must also state that research and publication ethics, as well as copyright regulations for intellectual and artistic works, have been followed. If the research involves human or animal subjects, it must be declared that it was conducted in accordance with international declarations and guidelines.

Ethics committee approval is not required for review articles. However, for articles that do not require ethics approval, this must be clearly stated on the first/last page and in the methodology section of the article.

Authors must disclose any financial support received during the research process in the article text.

Editor Responsibilities

The editor is responsible for ensuring the proper management of the publication process for all works submitted to the journal.

Members of the Editorial Board strive to continuously improve the journal and enhance publication quality.

The Editorial Board determines and implements journal policies regarding publication, peer review, evaluation processes, and ethical principles.

The Editorial Board seeks to meet the information needs of authors, reviewers, and readers about the journal and publication processes.

Editors ensure that journal publication processes are conducted in accordance with publication policies and inform those involved in the process about developments in publication policies.

Editors review and respond to complaints submitted to the journal.

Editors ensure the protection of personal data in reviewed articles and safeguard the personal information of authors, reviewers, and readers.

Editors are responsible for protecting the intellectual property rights of all published articles and defending the rights of the journal and authors in the event of possible violations. They also take necessary measures to ensure that the content of all published articles does not infringe on the intellectual property rights of other publications, including conducting originality checks.

If an article submission comes from the editorial team or the publishing institution, editorial roles are suspended during the peer review process to ensure that double-blind peer review is maintained.

In the context of double-blind peer review, authors’ identity information must be kept confidential.

Authors must receive clear and informative feedback and notifications.

The Editorial Board must take measures to prevent unethical behaviors such as plagiarism and citation manipulation.

When making decisions on articles (acceptance, rejection, etc.), the Editorial Board considers the originality, contribution to the field, validity and reliability of the research method, clarity of expression, and the aims and scope of the journal. Under no circumstances can the editor or editorial board consider the authors’ race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, thoughts, or beliefs.

Editors must apply the journal’s policies on double-blind peer review and evaluation processes and ensure that each article is reviewed impartially and within a reasonable timeframe.

Editors must support authors’ freedom of expression.

The editor and editorial board must evaluate submitted works according to the journal’s writing guidelines.

Editors must take into account consistent criticisms of articles published in the journal and allow the authors of the criticized articles the right to respond.

Reviewers must be selected according to their expertise in the subject of the study.

Reviewers must be provided with the necessary information and guidelines to carry out the evaluation process.

Conflicts of interest or shared interests between authors and reviewers must be monitored.

Reviewers’ identities must remain confidential.

Reviewers should be encouraged to evaluate works in an impartial, scientific, and objective manner.

Editors should strive to maintain a broad and continuously updated pool of reviewers.

Evaluations that do not comply with academic courtesy rules or are unscientific must be prevented.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers should accept to evaluate only articles related to their area of expertise.

A reviewer invited to evaluate a study must inform the editor as soon as possible whether they can accept the assignment.

Reviewers are obliged to evaluate works with impartiality and confidentiality.

Reviewers must not share or use the information contained in the manuscripts they are assigned to review without the explicit consent of the author prior to publication. They may only use the final published version of the work.

If reviewers detect any conflicts of interest, they must inform the editor and decline to review the relevant manuscript.

In the “Reviewer Evaluation Form,” reviewers must use a polite, respectful, and scientific tone. They must avoid hostile, defamatory, or insulting personal comments. If such unscientific comments are detected, the editor or the editorial board may contact the reviewer to revise their comments.

Reviewers must state in the Reviewer Evaluation Form whether the article is publishable and provide the reasons for their decision.

Reviewers must complete their evaluations within the time allocated to them.

Reviewers must inform the editors if they notice any similarities between the manuscript under review and previously published works.