The Editorial Board attaches particular importance to scientific integrity and adherence to the principles of academic ethics. „Adam Mickiewicz University Law Journal” follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), as well as COPE Guidelines on Authorship and AI tools. The journal also follows European Commission guidelines on Ethics in Social Science and Humanities. In order to ensure the originality of academic publications, the editors make use of the iThenticate anti-plagiarism system.

For the purposes of the „Adam Mickiewicz University Law Journal”, and with full acceptance of these recommendations, the principles of publishing ethics were implemented for each of the parties involved in the publication process, namely the editors, reviewers and authors.

The Responsibilities of Authors

Authors should present their research results in a reliable, credible, and honest way.

1. Authors shall submit only original texts that have not been published before, either in part or in whole, and which have not been submitted to another journal.
2. Authors should disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
3. Authors are obliged to disclose all the sources of funding of the research that resulted in the submitted article.
4. In the case of papers prepared by two or more authors, individual contributions to the publication must be indicated.
5. In the case of doctrinal legal papers based on the analysis of legal acts, case law, and academic literature, Authors are required to cite all sources fully and precisely in the footnotes, so that the analysis presented can be verified by the reader. If the submitted text contains the results of empirical research (e.g. quantitative analyses, surveys, statistical analyses of case law), Authors are required to describe the methodology applied in a manner allowing the research to be reproduced, and are encouraged to make the data used available in a publicly accessible repository, unless legal, ethical, or confidentiality considerations prevent this.
6. Authors are required to comply with European Commission guidelines on

Reviewers’ duties

The reviewer’s primary duty is to evaluate the text objectively. All comments, assessments and suggestions should be clearly indicated and supported with arguments.

1. Reviewers shall prepare reviews that are fair and substantive, and provide an unambiguous conclusion.
2. Reviewers shall observe the journal’s review procedure:
   - preparing anonymous reviews;
   - preparing reviews in accordance with the criteria of the review sheet.
3. Reviewers shall prepare the review within the stipulated deadline, i.e. one month. If they are unable to prepare a review, they should inform the Editor within one week of receiving a request to prepare a review.
4. Reviewers are obliged to inform the Editorial Board if there is a possible conflict of interest.
5. Reviewers should inform the Editorial Board if they detect any signs of the author’s scientific dishonesty (plagiarism, self-plagiarism, ghostwriting, guest authorship).
6. Reviewers prepare reviews free of charge, in accordance with the previously accepted custom.

Responsibilities of the Editors

1. The editors only accept original articles and commentaries that are in line with the profile, scope and purpose of the journal.
2. The evaluation of texts is not influenced by the nationality, ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation, or religious and political beliefs of the authors.
3. The editors only accept texts that are free of legal defects. Since plagiarism, self-plagiarism, ghostwriting, and guest authorship are examples of scientific dishonesty, the editors are obliged to expose all the cases that are detected, including notification of the relevant bodies (institutions employing the authors, scientific societies, associations of scientific editors, etc.).
4. Guided by the content of the texts, the editors appoint two reviewers affiliated with institutions other than that of the author. Reviews are double-blind.
5. If a reviewer does not prepare a review within the deadline, or for ethical reasons cannot prepare a review of a particular text, the editors will appoint a new reviewer.
6. The editors accept only reliable and substantive reviews.
7. The members of the Editorial Board will only accept texts for publication that have received two unequivocally positive reviews.
8. The editors guarantee the confidentiality of the review process and of the personal data of authors and reviewers.

Proceedings in the event of violations of the journal’s ethical principles

1. Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, ghostwriting, and guest authorship are examples of scientific dishonesty and constitute unethical scientific practice. The editors will document all examples of scientific dishonesty, especially violations and breaches of academic ethical principles.
2. In order to ensure the originality of the scientific publications, the editors use the iThenticate anti-plagiarism system. All the results of the anti-plagiarism check are analysed by the editors. If plagiarism or self-plagiarism is detected, the submitted text is rejected, and the author is informed in writing of the grounds for rejection.
3. If reviewers report suspected plagiarism or self-plagiarism to the editors, they will check the validity of the suspicion and inform the reviewers, the author, and the Editorial Committee of the results of the check. If the suspicion is confirmed to be justified, the submitted text will be rejected, and the author will be informed of the grounds for rejection of the text.
4. If readers of the journal report suspected plagiarism or self-plagiarism to the editors, the editors will check the validity of the suspicion and report the results of the check to the reviewers, the author, and the Editorial Committee. If the validity of the suspicion is confirmed, the published text will be withdrawn from all online platforms where the journal is available. Information about the basis for the removal of the text shall be provided on the electronic platforms and in the print version of the journal.
5. In all cases of detected plagiarism, the editors will inform the relevant bodies (institutions employing the authors, scientific societies, associations of scientific editors, etc.).
6. In the case of ghostwriting and guest authorship, the text will be rejected. The editors will inform the author(s) of the decision and the grounds for it, as well as the relevant institutions employing the author(s) or scientific societies with which the author(s) is/are affiliated.
7. If an error is detected in a published text that does not result from scientific dishonesty, the Editorial Board will publish a correction (erratum) indicating the scope and reason for the correction. The correction will be published on all electronic platforms where the text is available, together with a reference to the original version of the article.
8. The Editorial Board does not permit citation manipulation (e.g. reviewers or editors requiring citation of their own work without substantive justification) or the falsification or fabrication of research data. Where such practices are detected, the procedure described in points 1–6 above shall apply accordingly.

Complaints and Appeals Procedure

Appeals against editorial decisions
Authors who disagree with a decision to reject their text may submit a written appeal to zeszyt@amu.edu.pl within 14 days of receiving the decision. The appeal should include a specific, substantive justification addressing the reviewers' or editors' comments, as well as any new information relevant to the case. The Editor-in-Chief, in consultation with the other members of the Editorial Board, will consider the appeal within 30 days and will inform the author of the decision taken, together with its justification. The decision reached following consideration of the appeal is final.

Complaints concerning the editorial process
Complaints concerning the functioning of the Editorial Board, the conduct of reviewers, or the course of the publishing process (e.g. excessive delays, suspected conflict of interest) should be submitted in writing to zeszyt@amu.edu.pl. The Editorial Board will consider the complaint fairly, objectively, and confidentially, within 30 days, and will inform the complainant of the outcome of the proceedings.