Publishing ethics

The Editorial Board of the scientific periodical ‘‘JUSTICE’’ is committed to its editorial ethics and makes efforts to prevent the violation. The Editorial Board (hereinafter referred to as Editorial Council) of the scientific periodical ‘‘JUSTICE’’ (hereinafter referred to as “periodical”) is responsible for publishing the proposed material. When deciding on the publication, the Editorial Council is guided by the reliability of the data presented and the scientific significance of the given work. The Editorial Council may be guided by the periodical Editorial Council policy limiting the existing legal norms on defamation, copyright and plagiarism. Members of the Editorial Council may consult with other specialists during the publication decision.

The Editorial Council staff shall have the right to reject the publication of the scientific article (hereinafter referred to as article) in case of violation of the following ethical rules:

1. The references in the article do not correspond to reality,

2. There is an article mental and textual coincidences with other scientific work (plagiarism) without the reference,

3. The article is not actual and there is no scientific novelty in it; scientific issues are not guaranteed ( is not a scientific article),

4. The content and title of the article do not correspond to each other,

5. There is a dispute (complaint) the copyright of an article or part of it which has not yet been settled by law,

6. Publication of the article will violate the rights and legitimate interests of others (personal, family, medical, etc.),

7. Article has already been published (regardless of the print language: Armenian, Russian, English, etc.)

8. The research data contained in this article are not accurate due to misunderstanding, fraud or deception

The Chief Editor of the periodical before publishing scientific articles in the Periodical and submitting them to the Editorial Council guarantee must be submit these scientific articles anonymous (indirect, confidential) for review in which case the reviewer shall not be notified of the author of the scientific article, and the Editorial Council is not be notified of the reviewer. The reviewer must make an objective assessment of the scientific article. The author’s personal criticism is unacceptable. The reviewer must clearly and reasonably express his / her opinion. Editorial Council staff members (including reviewers) are obliged to provide no objection to the information about the article with the exception of authors, reviewers, inspectors, other editorial advisors and publishers.

The editorial staff does not have the right to use non-published materials without written consent of the author. Any confidential information or ideas received during the review of a scientific article should not be disclosed by members of the Editorial Council or end-use for personal gain. The member of the Editorial Council staff (including the reviewer) should not participate in the examination of the scientific article, if there are reasons to question their objectivity.