<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201c<\/strong>Fundamental Rights. Journal of anthropological, historical and juridical studies\u201d is a scientific journal peer-reviewed which is inspired by the ethical code of publication issued by COPE<\/abbr>: Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is necessary that all the involved parts \u2013 authors, direction committee, writers and referee \u2013 must know and agree with each other\u2019s about the following ethical requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Direction committee and writers\u2019 duties<\/u><\/strong> Correctness<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The direction committee evaluates the proposed articles for the publication on the bases of the scientific contents, without discrimination of authors\u2019 race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, ethnical origin, citizenship, political orientation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Confidentiality, conflict of interest and disclosure<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The direction committee, the writers and the other members of the staff commit not to reveal information about the proposed articles to people different from the author, the referees and the editor or printer and they also commit not to use in their own researches contents which are related to the proposed article, which is to be published, without author\u2019s written authorisation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Double blind peer-review<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The direction committee entrusts two referees with the anonymous evaluation of the proposed articles in order to have an evaluation about the pertinence or not of the contribution of the publication. The referees are external both to the direction committee and the editor staff. Referees\u2019 duties<\/u><\/strong> Contribution to the editorship\u2019s decision<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The peer-review is a procedure which helps the direction committee to accomplish to its own evaluation activity of the proposed articles and which allows even the author to improve his or her contribution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Respect of the times<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The referee who will think not to be adequate to the proposed task or who will think not to be able to accomplish the reading within the required times must communicate it to the direction committee immediately.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Objectiveness<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The peer- review must be conducted with objectiveness. Every personal judgement on the author is inappropriate. The referees must motivate their judgement adequately.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Indication of texts<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n The referee commits s\/he will precisely indicate the bibliographical details of the fundamentals works if the author omits them in the proposed article. In addition, the referee must inform the direction committee about possible similarities or overlaps contained both in the text received to be read and in other works which s\/he knows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Decisions about publication<\/strong>
The direction committee of \u201cFundamental Rights\u201d is responsible for the decision made about publishing or not the proposed articles. The direction committee can consult the referees to make this decision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n
<\/p>\n\n\n\n