logo Wydziału Prawa

Białostockie Studia Prawnicze

logo Temida2

The Publishing Ethics and Malpractice Statement


of publishing ethics

and proceedings against the prohibited publishing practices

 The „Bialystok Legal Studies” journal applies the following rules of publishing ethics and proceedings against the prohibited publishing practices:


  1. Editors included in the editorial team of the journal (hereafter „editors”) decide on the admissibility for the review process and for the publication process of the articles, commentaries and reviews (hereafter „publications”) submitted to the editorial team for publication.
  2. While deciding on the issues mentioned in p. 1 editors are bound by the legal regulations concerning violations of authorship rights, plagiarism and defamation. Decisions are taken based on the publishing policy of the journal elaborated in particular through the consultations with other members of the editorial team and reviewers.
  3. Editors are obliged to secure the application of generally accepted scientific publications’ standards and to exclude practices violating ethical norms.
  4. Editors are obliged to evaluate the submitted publications solely taking into consideration their substantive value, without distinction based on race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship or political views of the author.
  5. Editors are obliged to maintain confidentiality of the information concerning the submitted publications and of the author’s personal data. The obligation excludes situations when information is provided to authors, reviewers or potential reviewers, translators, proofreaders, publisher and other members of the journal’s editorial team.
  6. Editors are obliged to pursue to provide just and substantive evaluation of the publication submitted. Before processing of the submitted publications, editors are obliged to undertake actions aiming to reveal potential conflicts of interest between the author and reviewers, proofreaders, publisher and other members of the editorial team.
  7. Conflict of interest should be understood as personal relations between subjects mentioned in p. 6 such as consanguinity to the second degree, marriage, relations of professional subordination or direct scientific cooperation in the last two years preceding the processing of the submitted publication.
  8. If the conflict of interest as mentioned in p. 7 occurs, editors are obliged to delegate to process the submitted publication to another person with whom the conflict of interest does not occur.
  9. Editors are obliged to demand from all persons participating in the processing of the submitted publication to reveal all potential conflicts of interest.
  10. If conflict of interest is revealed after the publication is published, the editorial team is obliged to publish relevant statement on the journal’s website and to take other actions necessary to fix the situation and to prevent it from happening in the future.


  1. Publications published in the „Bialystok Legal Studies” journal are submitted to obligatory reviews. Articles are reviewed by two reviewers according to the rules of double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of the authors and reviewers are not revealed to each other. The reviewer signs the statement confirming there is no conflict of interest between the reviewer and the author.
  2. Submitting the article to the journal’s editorial team is equivalent with the author’s consent to review it.
  3. Submission of the publications is free of charge.
  4. The editorial team conducts initial verification of the submitted publications examining the topic of the article with the journal’s profile and with the editorial and technical requirements.
  5. Publications not fulfilling the criteria of scientific article will not be accepted for publication. Scientific article is defined as an article presenting results of original research of an empirical, theoretical or analytical nature which provides information on the title, names and last names of the authors, research methods, research process as well as its results and the conclusions along with the list of cited literature (bibliography).
  6. The initial evaluation of the publication is given within 30 days since the day on which the publication was submitted.
  7. Texts with positive initial evaluation by the editorial team are sent to two external reviewers who:
    1. are affiliated with institutions other than the author’s
    2. are not members of the journal’s editorial team
    3. possess at least doctoral degree and recognized scientific works that guarantees relevant level of the review.
  8. In case of an article written in a foreign language, at least one of the reviewers is affiliated with the foreign institution in a country other than nationality of the author of the article.
  9. Reviewers evaluate publications in the shortest possible time, no longer however than 30 days.
  10. While reviewing the text, the reviewers fill in the review form available on the journal’s website.
  11. The review ends with clear conclusion as to:
    1. allow the article for publication without changes (positive review)
    2. allow article for publication after the reviewers’ changes are taken into consideration (positive review)
    3. reject the article (negative review).
  12. Only publications with two positive reviews can be accepted for publishing process.
  13. If one review is positive and one is negative, the editorial team remains the right to call third reviewer
  14. After familiarizing with the reviewers’ opinion, the editorial team informs the author within 7 days about accepting the text for publishing (potentially about the need to modify it) or about its rejection.
  15. Author is given 14 days to modify the text and submit it for the final verification by the editorial team. Exceeding the time-limit is treated as author’s resignation from publishing the text in the journal.
  16. If the author does not accept the reviewers’ and editorial team’s comments, he/she has a right to appeal within 7 days since the reception of the reviews to the editor-in-chief of the journal. The appeal should include a reasoned statement of the author toward the comments given by the reviewers and the editorial team.
  17. Each final decision on the acceptance, rejection or sending for modification of the publication is taken by the editor-in-chief. If editor-in-chief is the author of the publication, all decisions are taken collectively by other members of the editorial team of the journal. If member of the editorial team is the author of the publication, all decisions concerning his/her publication are taken by the journal’s editor-in-chief.
  18. If the author does not accept the comments of the reviewers and the editorial team or if the editorial team does not agree with the statement and changes submitted by the author, author has the right to withdraw the publication and the editorial team has the right to reject it.
  19. Names and last names of the reviewers for particular volumes are not revealed.
  20. Once a year the journal publishes the list of journal’s reviewers.
  21. Written versions of the reviews are kept in the journal’s archives.


  1. An author is a person who:
    1. significantly contributed to the establishment of the concept of the publication or to the analysis and interpretation of the data,
    2. drafted an initial version of the text or conducted its critical evaluation bringing significant intellectual input,
    3. decided on the version of the text considered final for the publication.
  2. Each author is obliged to submit statement on the authorship rights waiver, percentage and substantive input into the publication, as well as confirming that the submitted publication has not been published before and has been submitted only to the „Bialystok Legal Studies”.
  3. Each author is obliged to submit statement that in reference to the submitted publication no violation of publishing ethics such as ghostwriting or guest authorship has occurred.
  4. All changes considering the authorship require written consent by all authors.
  5. The consent mentioned in p. 4 should be granted individually, in written, otherwise being invalid.
  6. Statement of will mentioned in p. 5 should be addressed to the editor-in-chief of the journal.
  7. Authors are obliged to provide clear cause for the proposed change in authorship of the publication.
  8. Editorial team is not liable for the content of the authors’ statements mentioned in p. 2-3 and 5.


  1. If it is revealed that the author of the publication has acted unethically, especially if it concerns plagiarism, falsifying data presented in the publication, submission of already published or partly published text (so called „auto plagiarism”), the editorial team requests clarifications from the author.
  2. If, after the clarifications are submitted, the unethical action mentioned in p. 1 is confirmed, editorial team may undertake relevant actions aiming at punishing the author.
  3. Actions taken by the editorial board may in particular include the following:
    1. informing authorities of the author’s scientific institution that is authorized to open disciplinary procedures against him/her,
    2. rejecting the submitted publication,
    3. rejecting any publication submitted to the journal by such author.
  4. At the moment of initial evaluation mentioned in § 2 p. 4 editors are obliged to verify as much as possible if the threat of violation of publishing ethics such as ghostwriting or guest authorship occurs.
  5. Ghostwriting is understood as a situation when a person who significantly contributed to the publication is not listed as its author or, in case of a purely technical input (one that does not qualify to consider the person an author) his/her input into the publication is not mentioned.
  6. Guest authorship is understood as a situation when a person listed as an author of the publication has not contributed to the publication or his/her contribution is marginal.
  7. If violations mentioned in p. 4 are revealed, the editorial team takes relevant actions as described in p. 2-3.
  8. If any violations concerning rules of the publishing ethics are revealed after the submitted publication is published, the editorial team takes all necessary actions aiming at publicizing the violations, including immediate publishing of an errata in a paper form, or in case of an electronic version – to include relevant changes and in justified cases – to fully withdraw the publication from the journal’s website.