Procedure for Handling Complaints on Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics Violations
Procedure for Handling Complaints by the Editorial Board
- Submission of a complaint
A complaint may be submitted by an author, reviewer, reader, or any other member of the research community.
The complaint must be submitted in a written form (via email to the journal’s editorial office) and must include:
– a clear and concise description of the violation;
– supporting evidence (e.g., source links, copies of documents, relevant excerpts from texts, etc.);
– the complainant’s contact details.
- Initial Assessment
The complaint is formally logged by the executive Editorial Secretary.
The Editor-in-Chief conducts a preliminary assessment to determine whether the matter falls within the scope of academic integrity and publication ethics.
In case of insufficient data, the complainant may be requested to supply additional documentation to enable evidence-based review.
- Review by the Editorial Board
The complaint is escalated to the Editorial Board for substantive consideration.
The Editorial Board considers:
– the nature of the violation (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication/falsification, duplicate publication, inappropriate authorship attribution, breaches of the peer-review process, etc.);
– the scope, severity, and potential consequences of the alleged breach;
– the credibility, relevance, and sufficiency of the evidence submitted.
– If necessary, independent external experts may be engaged to provide an impartial assessment.
- Decision-making
The Editorial Board may adopt one or more of the following resolutions:
– Dismiss the complaint (where it is unfounded or not supported by adequate evidence);
– Issue formal remarks to the author(s) and require the correction of errors or non-compliances;
– Reject the manuscript (where misconduct is identified during the review process);
– Retract an already published article (with an accompanying formal retraction notice);
– Notify the author’s affiliated institution and/or employer of documented breaches;
– Impose a temporary submission ban for the author(s) for a defined period (as a sanction proportionate to the breach).
- Notification of parties
The author(s) and the complainant receive written notification of the outcome and the rationale of the decision.
- In the event of retraction, the journal publishes a notice on its website clearly stating the reasons for the retraction.
- Appeal
The author or the complainant may submit an appeal within 30 calendar days of receiving the decision.
Appeals are reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and, where necessary, by members of the Editorial Board and/or external experts to ensure procedural robustness and due process.
- Governing principles of the process
Transparency – the procedure is formally documented and publicly available on the journal’s website.
Confidentiality – complainants and reviewers may remain anonymous upon request.
Impartiality – decisions are made collegially, based on a balanced assessment of all available evidence, with conflict-of-interest safeguards as applicable.
Alignment with International Standards – the procedure is governed by the principles and guidance of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics).
