Complaints procedure
The journal considers all substantiated complaints concerning potential violations of academic integrity, professional ethics, and editorial standards. This procedure applies to the actions of authors, reviewers, members of the Editorial Board, and other individuals involved in the editorial process. Matters subject to review include, in particular, plagiarism, improper borrowing, fabrication or falsification of data, manipulation of results, conflicts of interest, breaches of reviewer confidentiality, unethical authorship practices, and other violations of publication ethics. In handling complaints, the Editorial Board follows the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the European Association of Science Editors (EASE), and the journal’s own publication ethics principles.
Submission of a Complaint
A complaint must be submitted in writing to the email address of the Editor-in-Chief of the journal. The complaint must include the complainant’s contact details, reference to the relevant publication or material, and a clear and reasoned description of the alleged violation, including supporting evidence or sources. Anonymous complaints are generally not considered. However, the Editorial Office reserves the right to initiate an investigation if the information received indicates a potentially serious violation.
Preliminary Assessment
Upon receipt of a complaint, the Editor-in-Chief conducts a preliminary review of its content. At this stage, it is determined whether the matter falls within the journal’s competence and whether there are sufficient grounds for further consideration. The complainant is informed within 10 days whether the complaint has been registered or declined. If the complaint is deemed admissible, a formal review procedure is initiated.
Review Procedure
The review is conducted impartially, in accordance with the principles of confidentiality, presumption of good faith, and equality of the parties. Where necessary, a temporary committee of independent experts or members of the Editorial Board without conflicts of interest may be established. The Editorial Office may request additional materials and explanations from all parties, involve independent experts, use specialized verification tools, and follow the guidance of COPE and other international standards. The party against whom the complaint has been filed has the right to submit written explanations and supporting materials. The review should normally be completed within 30 days from the date of registration of the complaint. In complex cases, the review period may be extended with justification.
Decision and Measures
Following the review, the Editorial Office may determine that the complaint is unfounded; identify minor violations and request corrections; or establish the existence of significant misconduct and apply appropriate measures. Possible measures include rejection of a manuscript; requirement of corrections; publication of a clarification or correction notice; retraction of an article; temporary restriction on submission rights; or notification of the author’s institution or other competent authorities in cases of serious violations.
Confidentiality and Protection of Rights
The Editorial Office guarantees confidentiality of the review procedure and protection of the personal data of all parties involved. Information is disclosed only to the extent necessary for an objective resolution of the matter. All parties have the right to be informed about the progress of the review, to submit explanations, and to receive a reasoned decision.
Appeal
A party who disagrees with the Editorial Office’s decision has the right to submit a reasoned appeal within 10 days from the date of the decision. The appeal is reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief or the Editorial Board, taking into account additional arguments and materials. The decision resulting from the appeal is final.
