Publishing research in the Al-Bayan University Journal for Legal Studies is a continuous process of developing knowledge, and is a direct expression of the quality of legal research and the support provided by researchers and their supporting institutions. Al-Bayan University Journal for Legal Studies is committed to the highest standards of scientific review and professional arbitration. It is therefore considered essential that all persons involved in the production of the journal as writers, reviewers, and editors adhere to the highest levels of professionalism and agree to the standards of ethical conduct expected of all parties involved in the publishing process.

Al-Bayan University / College of Law, as the body that owns the journal, pledges to carry out its custodial duties at all stages of publication with all seriousness, and that the research submitted to the journal is subject to careful review and a careful editorial process before accepting it for publication. Advertisements or any other commercial revenues will not have any influence or influence on decisions. Editorial Board In addition, the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is beneficial to the editorial process.

First: Duties of writers/authors

  • Reporting standards:

Writers must ensure that they have written and presented original work, an accurate description of the research completed, and an objective discussion of its importance. Their research must include sufficient detail and references that allow others to benefit from it, review it, or replicate the work. Reference articles and research should also be professional and objective, and all data and words must be referenced. Accurately quoted. Authors may be required by the journal to submit basic data related to the paper for peer review, and they must retain that data for an appropriate period after publication.

  • Originality and plagiarism:

Authors are responsible for ensuring the originality of the works they submit, and if they use work or words from other sources, they must cite them appropriately. Plagiarism appears in many forms, from claiming to write articles that are not attributed to them, to using large parts of another article or research without indicating the reference or source, all the way to pretending to own the results of research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms is considered unethical and unacceptable behavior from the perspective of academic publishing.

  • Multiple, duplicate, or simultaneous deployments:

An author should not submit the same research to more than one major journal or publishing platform, and submitting research to several journals at the same time is considered unethical and unacceptable behavior in the field of academic publishing. In general, an author should not submit previously published research for consideration for publication in another journal.

 

  • Acknowledgment of sources:

Writers should always make appropriate reference to the work of others they have influenced when shaping or determining the content of the work they submit. You should avoid using or referring to information obtained by the writer in private ways, such as conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties, without obtaining express written permission from the source. Information obtained through confidential services, such as article evaluation or grant applications, should not be used without the express written consent of the author of the work participating in these services.

 

  • Copyright:

Intellectual property rights are reserved for those who have made significant contributions to the planning, design, implementation, or interpretation of the study. Therefore, the names of all individuals who made important contributions to the research project must be mentioned. The participation of other people in the technical aspects of the research, if any, must be acknowledged, or their names must be included as contributors, and the responsible author must ensure that all participants have reviewed the final version of the article and given their approval for its publication.

  • Fundamental errors in published works:

When an author discovers material errors or inaccuracies in his published work, he must immediately inform the editor or publisher and cooperate to retract or correct the work. If a significant third-party error becomes known, the author must retract or correct the work or provide evidence supporting the validity of the original research.

 

Second: Duties of editors

  • Publishing decisions:

The editor-in-chief of the journal is responsible for the decision to publish research, and the decision to publish must be accompanied by the approval of the researchers and its importance to readers. The editor adheres to the journal's policies and legal requirements regarding copyright, defamation, and plagiarism. The editor may consult others to make this decision.

  • Fair judgment:

The editor must evaluate manuscripts based on their intellectual content, and not on the author's origin, gender, religious beliefs, ethnicity, nationality, or political positions.

 

  • Confidentiality:

The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board must refrain from sharing any information about the submitted manuscript with anyone other than the author, reviewers, evaluation persons, and editorial advisors.

  • Disclosure and conflicts of interest:

The editor must not use any part of the manuscript submitted to him or her in his or her research without the express written consent of the author. The editor must keep the unique information or ideas obtained from the reviewers' evaluation confidential and not use it for personal gain. The editor should refrain from reviewing manuscripts that conflict with his or her interests or have conflicts with any competitive or collaborative relationships or connections with authors or relevant companies. Contributors should disclose competing interests post corrections if competing interests are discovered after publication, and take further corrective action if necessary. Reviews of supplements should exist in the same context as a review of the main articles. Supplements should be accepted based on the academic value and interests of readers without the influence of commercial considerations.

  • Consider complaints and cooperate in investigations

The editor should take appropriate action when ethical complaints are raised about a submitted manuscript or published article. These procedures include contacting the author of the manuscript or article, carefully considering complaints and allegations made, and may also include contacting institutions related to the research. If the complaint is confirmed, corrections should be posted, the posting, or express concern, as the case may be. Any unethical behavior discovered in published articles must be reviewed, even if discovered sometime after publication.

  • Measures taken in cases of plagiarism

The magazine adopts a zero-tolerance policy towards plagiarism, cheating, plagiarism, copyright infringement, or any violation of publishing ethics and copyright applicable to the relevant laws or recognized rules in research and writing. Writers who resort to such methods are strongly warned or placed in detention. Blacklist immediately, or take any other legal action depending on the seriousness and nature of the unethical behavior.

Third: Duties of evaluators/arbitrators

  • Contributing to the decisions of the editorial board:

Reviewer review is an important process that contributes to making editorial decisions regarding the publication of research and also contributes to improving research through communication between editors and authors. Evaluator review is an essential part of formal scientific work and represents the essence of the scientific method. The journal believes that all scientists wishing to contribute to publications should contribute fairly to the review process.

  • the speed:

The appointed reviewer should notify the editor-in-chief and decline to participate in the review process if he or she feels unqualified to evaluate the research in question in the manuscript, or if he or she believes that completing the evaluation promptly will be difficult.

  • Privacy:

Papers assigned for evaluation should be considered confidential documents and should not be displayed or discussed with others without permission from the editor.

  • Objectivity standards:

Evaluation should be objective, personal criticism should not be directed at the author, and evaluators should clearly state their opinions with supporting arguments.

  • Acknowledgment of sources:

Reviewers must identify related published works not referenced by the author, and any prior citation, derivation, or argument must be accompanied by appropriate reference. Furthermore, reviewers should highlight any significant similarity or overlap between the proposed research (submitted for publication) and any previous published research of which they are familiar.

 

  • Disclosure of conflicts of interest:

Unpublished material disclosed in the manuscript should not be used in any personal research by the reviewer without express written consent from the author. Unique information or ideas obtained through the review process must be kept confidential and not exploited for personal purposes. In addition, reviewers should avoid reviewing manuscripts that raise conflicts of interest resulting from competitive or collaborative relationships or any connections with the authors, companies, or institutions involved in the research.