Complaints Procedure

Procedure for Handling Complaints on Violations of Academic Integrity and Publication Ethics

The Editorial Board ensures a transparent and fair procedure for handling complaints related to potential violations of academic integrity and publication ethics.

This procedure establishes the process for reviewing complaints regarding ethical misconduct by authors, reviewers, or members of the editorial board. It applies to issues related to plagiarism, improper use of materials, conflicts of interest, data manipulation, and other violations of academic integrity.

Submission of a Complaint

Complaints regarding potential violations (plagiarism, fabrication or falsification of data, duplicate publication, copyright infringement, conflicts of interest) must be submitted electronically to the official journal email address, specifying the nature of the violation and, where possible, providing supporting evidence.

Anonymous complaints are not considered. A complaint must clearly include:

  • contact details of the complainant;
  • a reference (link) to the publication or material under consideration;
  • a detailed description of the violation with supporting evidence.

Preliminary Review

The Editor-in-Chief or an authorized member of the Editorial Board conducts an initial assessment of the validity of the complaint and decides on further consideration.

Within five working days, the authorized person verifies:

  • whether the complaint falls within the journal’s scope;
  • whether there are sufficient grounds for review.

The complainant is notified of the registration of the complaint or the refusal to consider it.

Expert Evaluation

If necessary, the Editorial Board may involve independent experts or reviewers to conduct an additional assessment of the materials and facts presented in the complaint.

The review panel has the right to:

  • request additional materials and explanations;
  • involve independent experts;
  • conduct consultations with all parties concerned.

The review period shall not exceed 30 calendar days.

Notification of the Parties

The author(s) of the manuscript are informed about the substance of the complaint and have the right to provide written explanations or reasoned objections.

Decision-Making

Based on the results of the review, the Editorial Board makes a decision, which may include:

  • rejecting the complaint as unfounded;
  • recognizing the violation as minor and recommending corrections;
  • recognizing the violation as significant and taking appropriate measures.

Possible measures in cases of significant violations include:

  • rejection of the manuscript;
  • retraction of an already published article;
  • temporary ban on future submissions;
  • notification of the author’s affiliated institution.

Confidentiality

All stages of the complaint review process are conducted in accordance with the principles of confidentiality and impartiality.

Protection of the Parties’ Rights

All parties involved have the right to:

  • receive full information about the review process;
  • provide explanations and evidence;
  • appeal the decision of the panel.

Appeals Procedure

The decision of the panel may be appealed within 14 days to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief reviews the appeal within ten working days. The decision of the Editor-in-Chief is final.

Members of the Editorial Board must adhere to the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the European Association of Science Editors (EASE), and the journal’s publication ethics principles.