Procedure for reviewing complaints regarding violations of ethical standards

    1. General Provisions

    The Editorial Office ensures a transparent, objective, and timely procedure for handling complaints regarding potential violations of academic integrity and publication ethics.

    This policy is based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the European Association of Science Editors (EASE).

    Complaints may relate, in particular, to:

    • plagiarism and self-plagiarism;
    • fabrication or falsification of data;
    • duplicate publication;
    • copyright infringement;
    • conflicts of interest;
    • other violations of ethical standards.

    The key principle of handling such complaints is that each case is considered objectively, in accordance with international ethical standards, while ensuring a fair balance of the rights of all parties involved.

     

    1. Submission of a Complaint

    A complaint must be submitted to the Editorial Office in electronic form and should include:

    • contact details of the complainant;
    • a reference (link) to the relevant material;
    • a clear description of the alleged violation;
    • supporting evidence, where possible;
    • the date of submission.

    Anonymous complaints are not considered.

     

    1. Preliminary Assessment

    The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized member of the Editorial Board conducts an initial assessment within 5 working days.

    Based on this assessment:

    • the complaint is accepted for consideration; or
    • it is rejected as unfounded.

    The complainant is duly informed of the decision.

     

    1. Review and Investigation

    If the complaint is accepted:

    • an internal review is conducted;
    • independent experts may be involved, where necessary;
    • explanations are requested from the parties involved;
    • supporting evidence may be requested.

    The review period is up to 30 calendar days.

     

    1. Notification of the Parties

    Authors or other involved parties:

    • are informed about the substance of the complaint;
    • have the right to provide written explanations and supporting evidence;
    • have the right to be informed about the progress of the review.

     

    1. Decision-Making

    Based on the results of the review, the Editorial Office may decide to:

    • reject the complaint;
    • request a correction;
    • confirm a violation and apply appropriate measures.

    In cases of significant violations, the following actions may be taken:

    • rejection of the manuscript;
    • retraction of the article;
    • temporary restriction on future submissions;
    • notification of the author’s institution.

    The complainant and other relevant parties are informed of the decision.

     

    1. Confidentiality and Impartiality

    Complaints are handled in compliance with:

    • confidentiality;
    • impartiality;
    • the principle of equality of the parties.

    Individuals with a potential conflict of interest are excluded from the process.

     

    1. Rights of the Parties

    Participants in the process have the right to:

    • receive information about the progress of the review;
    • submit explanations and evidence;
    • appeal the decision.

     

    1. Appeals Procedure

    An appeal must be submitted within 14 days.

    The Editor-in-Chief considers the appeal within 10 working days.

    The decision is final.

    The adoption of a decision does not deprive the applicant or other interested person of the right to resort to the forms of protection provided for by applicable law.