The Lawyer Quarterly (TLQ) publishes scholarly articles whose high quality is assured by an anonymous peer review process. The editors ensure that the review and evaluation of manuscripts is thorough, objective, and fair.

This Code of Ethics describes the principles of ethical conduct for all participants in the review and evaluation of manuscripts. Authors, reviewers, and editors are required to adhere to the rules set forth in this Code of Ethics. Authors and reviewers are subject to the guidelines of the journal’s editorial board.

The Code of Ethics of TLQ is primarily based on principles stemming from

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Ethics (Guide for new researchers:
https://publicationethics.org/files/2003pdf12_0.pdf;

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers:
 https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines-new/cope-ethical-guidelines-peer-reviewers;

COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors:
 https://publicationethics.org/files/u2/Best_Practice.pdf).

 

Authors

Each manuscript submitted for peer review by TLQ must be an original work of authorship.  By submitting a manuscript to the Editorial Board, the author confirms the following:           

The manuscript must not contain plagiarism, falsification, fabrication or serious omissions. Authors are required to refer to the works of other authors when quoting them verbatim or paraphrasing their ideas. In case of plagiarism or self-plagiarism (republication of one's own works), the manuscript will be rejected.

The submitted manuscript is their original work. Plagiarism, including duplicate publication of the author’s own work without proper citation and paraphrasing of text, concepts, and ideas, is an unacceptable practice. Any cases of ethical misconduct are taken very seriously. They will be investigated thoroughly and dealt with in accordance with the COPE guidelines - especially the Text recycling guidelines for editors and the Retraction guidelines (https://publicationethics.org/retraction-guidelineshttps://publicationethics.org/sites/default/files/Web_A29298_COPE_Text_Recycling.pdf).

• The author only submits manuscripts not published previously elsewhere;
• The author only submits manuscripts that they currently, or until the review process is completed, does not intend to publish elsewhere and the submission of the article exclusive;
• The author is the sole owner of the copyright for the submitted manuscript; in case there are co-authors, all authors must be listed and agree with the publication of the manuscript;
• The author has informed the Executive Editor about any conflicts of interest related to the submitted manuscript;
• Clearly, accurately, and unequivocally lists all sources used when writing the manuscript;
• The Author agrees with the peer-review process;
• Submits the article to a double-blinded anonymous review process and other evaluations/recommendations of the Head of the Editorial Board or Executive Editor;
• Informs the Executive Editor about any potential errors in the manuscript, including errors in the results of research described in the manuscript; and
• Grants the Publisher free of charge the right to publish the manuscript in printed or electronic form and publicize the article in databases, in which TLQ is included.

• Use of AI-based tools – Articles submitted to The Lawyer Quarterly should not be generated by AI.
• Creation or modification of graphical content using AI software is prohibited for images presenting data (graphs, maps, analysis results, etc.). The use must be clearly stated in the image caption.

The author is required to disclose in the manuscript any financial or other conflicts of interest that might affect the results presented in the manuscript or their interpretation. All sources of financial support must be disclosed. The author must adhere to citation ethics, follow the rules for citing sources, and acknowledge all sources used.

 

Reviewer

Reviewers are usually two renowned experts in the field, but not from the same department or institute, school, as the author of the paper under review.

Reviewers must decline to review a manuscript in which they believe they have an actual or potential conflict of interest. In case of doubt as to whether there is a conflict of interest, reviewers shall inform the Editor-in-Chief/Executive Editor of this fact. Protected information or ideas obtained in the review process are considered confidential and must not be misused for personal gain. Reviewers must strictly observe the anonymity of the peer review process (double blind peer review).

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts in an unbiased, objective, fair and professional manner. Reviewers are honest with the author if they have doubts about the quality of the manuscript, but without personal attacks on the author. Reviewers are expected to adequately justify their recommendations to the editors and to provide the author with an appropriate amount of commentary and, where appropriate, recommendations. The reviewers will produce their review in a timely manner according to the agreed deadline, usually within 21-30 days (depending on the complexity of the text). Peer reviewers are accountable for the accuracy and views expressed in their reports,

By accepting a manuscript, the reviewer undertakes to:

• immediately inform the Executive Editor over any conflict of interest;
• ensure that information related to the manuscript and contained in it remains confidential;
• point out to the Executive Editor all circumstances that could be a reason for rejecting the publication of the manuscript;
• always evaluate manuscripts based on their content;
• write the review report personally and to the best of own belief and knowledge;
• inform the editor if they do not feel sufficiently qualified to evaluate the manuscript professionally or if they cannot submit the review for any other reasons on their side.

Peer review reports should be in English; peer reviewers do not upload manuscripts into generative AI tools.

 

Editors

The editors (members of the editorial board) retain their independence. They do not abuse their position and approach authors objectively, discreetly, constructively and impartially. They evaluate manuscripts only on the basis of their professional merits, relying on peer review. Editors should avoid potential conflicts of interest between authors and reviewers. The editors strive for theoretical and methodological pluralism, but at the same time expect manuscripts to be of an appropriate professional standard and to be useful and accessible to the reader. In the event of proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the editors will take the necessary steps to clarify and correct the situation. The editors will not include a manuscript in the TLQ that is suspected to be unoriginal or to have been plagiarized.

The editors do not provide the paper and the information concerning it, including the reviews, to anyone other than the reviewers, authors, co-authors or members of the editorial board, while always maintaining the anonymity of the authors and reviewers.

Responsibility for accepting or rejecting manuscripts rests with the editorial office, which respects the recommendations of the reviewers. The editorial board informs the reviewers of the results of the review process and of the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript.

• • All articles published in this journal have undergone a thorough review process that includes an initial review by the editor and an anonymized peer review by two anonymous reviewers.
  • The Executive Editor of TLQ decides which of the articles submitted to the journal shall be published. The editor follows the policy of the Editorial Board and valid legislation related to slander, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Executive Editor may consult their decisions with the Head of the Editorial Board or reviewers.
  • The Executive Editor evaluates the manuscript based on its intellectual content, regardless of the race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic background, citizenship, and political inclinations of the author.
  • The Executive Editor, or any other member of the office, may not disclose any information about submitted manuscripts to any other person than the author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the Publisher.
  • The Executive Editor’s duty is to ensure a just and relevant review process. The Executive Editor must refuse to take part in reviewing the manuscripts (i.e., must ask a member of the Editorial Board to manage the review and evaluation process), if in the given case there is a conflict of interest due to competitive relations, relations based on cooperation, or connections with any of the authors, organizations and institutions connected with the given work. The editor must require all contributors to specify all conflicts of interest and publish a correction if a conflict of interest occurred after the article was published. If necessary, other measures may be taken, including publication of an announcement on a withdrawal of articles and notification of possible errors.
  • The Executive Editor must not use unpublished materials from submitted manuscripts for their own research without explicit written approval of the author(s). Protected information and ideas received during the review process must be considered confidential and may not be used for personal benefit. It is the editor’s responsibility to ensure that editorial decisions are not influenced by income from advertising, reprint, and other commercial activities.

 

Publisher

TLQ is interested in having the roles of the publisher and editor well-defined to ensure the autonomy of editorial decisions without any influence from advertisers and other commercial partners.

We protect the intellectual property and copyright of TLQ, its brands, authors, and publication partners by presenting and preserving the final published version of each article. TLQ guarantees the integrity and transparency of all published articles with respect to conflicts of interest, financing of publication and research, publication and research ethics, publication and research errors, the confidentiality of information, authorship, corrections, clarification, and withdrawal of articles, including the publication of content.

In case of presumed or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in close cooperation with editors, shall take all measures necessary to clarify the situation and fix the article in question. This includes the immediate publication of an announcement of correction or, in the most serious cases, a retraction of the work in question.