Ethical Standards

Responsibilities of Editors

• Act in a balanced, objective, and fair manner in the exercise of their functions, without discriminating against authors based on gender, sexual orientation, religious or political beliefs, ethnicity, or origin.
• Handle submissions of sponsored issues or special editions in the same way as other submissions, ensuring that articles are considered and accepted based solely on their academic merit, not commercial interests.
• Adopt and follow reasonable procedures in the case of ethical complaints or conflicts of interest. Provide all authors with a reasonable opportunity to defend themselves against any claims. All claims must be investigated independently of the date of approval of the original publication. All documentation associated with any claim should be retained.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

• Contribute to the decision-making process and help improve the quality of published work through the objective review of the manuscript, adhering to deadlines.
• Maintain confidentiality of information provided by the editor or author. Do not retain or copy the manuscript.
• Alert the editor to any work, submitted or published, that is in some way similar to the one under review.
• Be aware of potential conflicts of interest (financial, institutional, collaborative, or any other type of relationship between the reviewer and the author) and alert the editor to these. If necessary, resign from reviewing that manuscript.

Responsibilities of Authors

• Maintain an accurate record of data related to the submitted manuscript and provide or facilitate access to such data upon request.
• Enter these documents into a database for later public consultation, if deemed appropriate and allowed by the employer, funding body, or others with an interest in the work. Confirm and ensure that the submitted manuscript is not being considered or has been accepted for publication elsewhere. If sections of its content match the content of a published or submitted work, proper citation must be made. Additionally, provide the editor with a copy of any submitted manuscript with content similarities.
• Confirm that all work included in the submitted manuscript is original and cite correctly any content taken from other sources. Obtain the appropriate permission to reproduce any content from other sources. Ensure that all studies involving humans or animals comply with national, local, and institutional laws and requirements (e.g., the Declaration of Helsinki of the World Medical Association -WMA-, the Policy of the National Institutes of Health -NIH- on the use of laboratory animals, or EU guidelines on the use of animals); and confirm that relevant approval has been sought and obtained, as appropriate.
• Authors must obtain written informed consent for studies involving humans and respect their privacy. Declare any potential conflict of interest (e.g., if the author has any personal interest -real or apparent- that could significantly influence their responsibilities at any time during the publication process). Immediately notify the editor or journal publisher if a significant error is identified in their publication. Collaborate with the editor and publisher in publishing the respective erratum, addendum, corrigendum, or article withdrawal, as deemed necessary.

Responsibilities of the Publisher

The Universidad del Norte will ensure that good practices are closely linked to the aforementioned standards.

Procedures for Dealing with Inappropriate Conduct

Detection of Inappropriate Conduct

Unethical behavior and inappropriate conduct can be identified and reported to the editor and publisher at any time by anyone. Unethical behavior and inappropriate conduct may include, but are not necessarily limited to, cases as outlined above. The person reporting to the editor or publisher must provide sufficient information and evidence to initiate a formal investigation. All reports must be taken seriously and treated in the same manner until a successful decision or conclusion is reached.

Investigation

The editor must decide whether to initiate an investigation and consult or seek advice from the publisher and legal office, as appropriate. Evidence must be collected and kept from being disseminated to the scientific community. Minor Offenses

Minor inappropriate conduct may be resolved without the need for further consultations. In any case, the author must be given the opportunity to respond to the accusations. Serious Offenses

For serious inappropriate conduct, the accused's employers may be notified. The editor, with the advice of the publisher, decides whether to involve the employers; they must examine the available evidence themselves or with the help of a limited number of experts. Consequences (In order of decreasing severity). Depending on the situation, one or more of the following measures may be taken:

The author or reviewer is informed that a misunderstanding or misapplication of acceptable standards has been detected. The author or reviewer is informed through a more assertive letter, explaining the inappropriate conduct and serving as a warning for the future. Publication of a formal notice detailing the inappropriate conduct. Publication of an editorial detailing the inappropriate conduct. Sending an official letter to the head of the authors' or reviewers' department or sponsoring agency. Formal withdrawal of the publication from the journal, along with a notice to the head of the authors' or reviewers' department, indexing and abstracting services, and readers of the publication. Official embargo on contributions from an individual/author for a defined period. Sending a report detailing the case and its outcome to a professional organization or higher authority for further investigation and action.

Peer Review Process

Upon receiving an article, the editorial team assesses whether it meets the basic requirements set by the journal. The editorial team establishes the first filter, taking into account format, quality, and relevance, and after this initial review, the articles that will undergo the arbitration process are defined. The texts are, at this stage, subjected to evaluation by anonymous academic peers and the editorial team's opinion. The result will be communicated to the author within six months of receiving the article. If the evaluation process exceeds this period, the editor must inform the author of this situation.

All articles that pass the initial review filter will undergo an arbitration process by peer reviewers, who may make suggestions to the author, pointing out significant references that have not been included in the work. These readers are mostly external to the institution, and their selection aims to avoid conflicts of interest with the themes on which they must provide opinions. In case of any doubt, a replacement of the reviewer will be carried out.

The journal has a format that contains questions with carefully defined criteria, which the reviewer must answer about the article under evaluation. At the same time, they have the responsibility to accept, reject, or approve the article with modifications.

During the evaluation, both the names of the authors and reviewers will be kept completely anonymous.

You can view the flowchart of the Law Journal at the following link.

Publication Frequency

The Law Journal is published biannually.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content under the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater exchange of global knowledge.

Sponsors

Universidad del Norte Editions.