Preview

Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law

Advanced search

Editorial Policies

Aim and Scope

The International scientific and practical law journal is intended for the exchange of opinions on the theory and practice of law in Kazakhstan, CIS countries and foreign countries. The scientific journal offers an interdisciplinary approach, strives to achieve broad international appeal, attract contributions and solve issues from various legal relations, as well as theoretical and practical problems of public interest.

The purposes of the journal are to publish the main provisions and results of scientific research, articles by research scientists in legal and international legal areas.

The tasks of the journal are:

  • consolidation and development of legal doctrines of foreign and national level in the formation of the rule of law and civil society in the scientific and publishing sphere;
  • promotion of advanced concepts and practices of effective management of scientific, innovative and educational activities of leading researchers both within the state and abroad;
  • improving the professional level of scientists in the field of jurisprudence and related fields;
  • to enrich the experience of the scientific school by contributing to the critical analysis of the assumptions and theories underlying the curriculum of the law school
  • to create an open scientific discussion in the scientific community, to exchange experience among scientists;
  • to make available in the scientific environment the results of research and scientific novelty of scientists.

 

Section Policies

STATE LAW AND MANAGEMENT
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
CIVIL LAW, CIVIL PROCEDURE
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
CRIMINAL LAW, CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Publication Frequency

4 issues per year

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides direct open access to its content based on the following principle: free open access to research results increases global knowledge sharing.

 

Archiving

  • Russian State Library (RSL)
  • National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)

 

Peer-Review

double-blind peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law". This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.

1. Reviewing of articles is carried out by members of the editorial board as well as invited reviewers — leading experts in the relevant field of science. The decision on the selection of a particular reviewer for the evaluation of the article is made by the editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief, scientific editor, or head of the editorial office. The review period is four weeks, but it may be extended at the request of the reviewer.

2. Reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment should any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. Based on the results of the manuscript review, the reviewer provides recommendations regarding the further fate of the article (each decision made by the reviewer must be justified):

- the article is recommended for publication in its current form;

- the article is recommended for publication after correction of the deficiencies noted by the reviewer;

- the article requires additional review by another specialist;

- the article cannot be published in the journal.

3. If the review contains recommendations for revising and improving the article, the journal’s editorial office sends the author the text of the review with a proposal to take the comments into account when preparing a revised version of the article or to provide a reasoned rebuttal (partially or fully). The revision process should not take more than 2 months from the date the email requesting changes is sent to the authors. The revised article is then resubmitted for review.

4. In case the authors refuse to revise the materials, they must inform the editorial office of their decision to withdraw the article from publication, either in writing or orally. If the authors do not return the revised version within 3 months from the date the review was sent, and no information is received from the authors regarding refusal to revise the article, the editorial office removes it from consideration. In such cases, the authors are sent a corresponding notice stating that the manuscript has been deregistered due to the expiration of the revision period.

5. If the author and the reviewers encounter irreconcilable disagreements regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to submit the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the final decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.

6. The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.

7. Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.

8. Kindly note that positive review does not guarantee the acceptance, as final decision in all cases lies with the editorial board. By his authority, editor-in-chief rules final solution of every conflict.

9. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 3 years.

10. The editorial office of the journal sends copies of the reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Republic of Kazakhstan upon receiving the corresponding request.

 

Publishing Ethics

The journal «Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law» adheres to internationally recognized rules governing ethical relationships between all participants in the publication process: authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, and founders, when making decisions and resolving potential conflicts.

1. Introduction

1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law"

1.2.Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.

1.3. The publisher undertakes the obligation to exercise strict oversight over the scientific materials.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law"  is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law" journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

2.2.Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

2.3.Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law" must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

2.4.Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

2.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

2.5.Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.

3.    Duties of Reviewers

3.1.Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

3.2.Promptness – Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law" and excuse himself from the review process.

3.3.Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

3.4.Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

3.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers  should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

3.6.1.Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

3.6.2. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1.Reporting standards

4.1.1. Authors of papers about original research should provide an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

4.2.Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

4.3.Originality and Plagiarism

4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.

4.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

4.6.Authorship of the Paper

4.6.1. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

4.7.Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

4.7.1. If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

4.7.2. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

4.8.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

4.9. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law" journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.

5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)

5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law" in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

5.2. The publisher should support “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law" journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.

5.4. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.

The section is prepared according to the files (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf) of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/). 

 

Founder

  • Turan University

 

Author fees

Publication in “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law" is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal does not have any Article processing charges.

The journal does not have any Article submission charges.

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

 

Plagiarism detection

“Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.

 

Preprint and postprint Policy

Prior to acceptance and publication in “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.

As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in “Eurasian Scientific Journal of Law" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Glossary (by SHERPA)

Preprint - In the context of Open Access, a preprint is a draft of an academic article or other publication before it has been submitted for peer-review or other quality assurance procedure as part of the publication process. Preprints cover initial and successive drafts of articles, working papers or draft conference papers.
 
Postprint - The final version of an academic article or other publication - after it has been peer-reviewed and revised into its final form by the author. As a general term this covers both the author's final version and the version as published, with formatting and copy-editing changes in place.

 

Revenue Sources

The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization, at the expense of the publisher, publication of advertising materials, publication of reprints, article processment charges.