Code of Ethics
ANTOLOGIA DI DIRITTO PUBBLICO (ADP)
CODE OF ETHICS
Courtesy translation from the Italian version
(full text available here)
Title I – Duties of the Journal’s Editorial Bodies
1. The Code of Ethics of the Journal Antologia di Diritto Pubblico complies with the guidelines outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to ensure an ethical approach to the publication of scientific works. The scientific operations of the Journal align with the spirit of COPE recommendations for adopting all possible measures against malpractice and upholding ethical best practices in the publishing process.
2. In its decisions, the Editorial Board is required to respect the strategies and editorial framework of the Journal. Furthermore, it is bound by applicable legal provisions regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
3. The Editorial Board, including the Directors, and the Scientific Committee shall make their determinations exclusively based on the scientific value, relevance, and originality of the texts and contributions considered for publication, without discrimination based on sex, gender, religion, ethnic origin, nationality, sexual orientation, gender identity, age, or political orientation of the Authors.
4. The members of the Editorial Board (including the Directors), the Scientific Committee, and the Editorial Secretariat undertake not to disclose information about contributions intended for the second section of the Journal to anyone other than the Author, the reviewers, and the publisher or printer. Moreover, they undertake not to use the content of unpublished articles for their own research without the express written consent of the Author.
5. The Journal adopts a double-blind peer review process to ensure that submitted material remains strictly confidential during evaluation. The Directors select reviewers based on their expertise to ensure an appropriate evaluation of the articles.
Title II – Duties of Authors of Contributions to be Published in the Second Section of the Journal
6. Authors guarantee that the contribution submitted for evaluation is unpublished, scientifically original, and has not been concurrently submitted to other journals, volumes, or periodicals. The article may subsequently be published in other periodicals or volumes only with the express authorization of the Editorial Board. Authors are also required to properly cite all texts utilized in accordance with the Journal’s editorial guidelines, and to ensure that the work and/or words of other authors are appropriately paraphrased or literally quoted with clear disclosure of the sources. Furthermore, authors are required to adhere to the editorial rules of the Journal.
7. The Directors may request from the Authors any corrections and additions deemed appropriate, including those resulting from the anonymous peer review. The Editorial Secretariat may bring the reviewers’ feedback to the Author’s attention. The Editorial Board shall decide upon any observations or objections that Authors may express regarding the reviewers’ feedback.
The Editorial Board reserves the right to make purely editorial changes after the first proofreading to ensure the publication’s consistency.
8. Authorship of the work shall be clearly stated: all individuals who have made a significant contribution to the creation of the text shall appear as co-authors. Any significant contribution made by other individuals to specific phases of the research shall also be explicitly acknowledged. In the case of co-authored contributions, the input of each Author shall be correctly and clearly displayed.
9. Authors shall not have conflicts of interest that could influence the results achieved, the arguments advanced, or the interpretations proposed. Authors shall also indicate any funders of the research or project from which the contribution derives.
If an Author identifies a significant error or inaccuracy in their article, they shall promptly notify the Journal and provide all necessary information to state the mandatory changes in a footnote or appendix to the article.
Title III – Duties of Reviewers and Review Procedures
Duties of Reviewers
10. The peer review process assists the Editorial Board in evaluating the scientific quality of proposed contributions and it also enables the Authors to improve their work.
11. Any reviewer who does not feel adequately or sufficiently qualified to review the research presented in a manuscript, or who believes they cannot complete the review within the indicated timeframe, shall promptly notify the Editorial Board and withdraw from the review process.
12. Peer review shall be conducted fairly and objectively. Reviewers are expected to substantiate their evaluations in an adequate and documented manner. Any personal judgment regarding the Author is inappropriate, and personal insults are prohibited. Comments shall be technically well-formulated and free from ideological criticism or any personal scientific-cultural preconceptions. Every quoted statement, observation, or argument should preferably be accompanied by a corresponding citation and/or documentation.
13. Reviewers are asked to indicate, with bibliographic details, any fundamental works overlooked by the Author in their contribution. Reviewers shall also report any similarities or overlaps between the text under review for reading and any other works known to them.
14. Manuscripts received for review shall be treated as confidential. They shall not be shown to or discussed with anyone unless authorized by the Directors. Confidential information or insights obtained during the peer review process shall be held in strict confidence and cannot be used for personal advantage.
15. Reviewers shall not accept to evaluate any contributions for which a conflict of interest arises due to specific prior relations of collaboration or competition with the Author (who, though anonymous, may be identified by deduction) and/or due to connections with the Authors, bodies, or institutions linked to the manuscript.
Review Procedures
16. In order to ensure a high standard of scientific quality for published contributions, in compliance with the principles of scientific research integrity (Dignity; Responsibility; Fairness; Correctness; Diligence – pursuant to the Guidelines for Research Integrity developed by the CNR), the Journal adopts a review model for submitted manuscripts that is structured in two phases: i) preliminary evaluation; ii) double-blind peer review.
17. The preliminary evaluation is carried out by the Directors in order to verify, first and foremost, the coherence of the text with respect to the content of the classic text being commented upon and, secondly, the existence of the minimum requirements for publication, also in relation to the editorial criteria of Antologia di Diritto Pubblico. If the submitted manuscripts pass the preliminary evaluation, they undergo peer review.
18. Peer review is carried out according to the double-blind model. The review is performed by two anonymous experts (the referees), whose judgments are formalized in a specific evaluation form that will be preserved in the archive of Antologia di Diritto Pubblico.
19. Following anonymization, the contribution is sent by the Editorial Secretariat to an evaluator, chosen by the Directors based on specific thematic expertise and according to a rotation criterion. In the event of self-citation by the Author or if elements are detected that could make the Author recognizable to the Reviewer, the Editorial Secretariat shall modify these textual passages to guarantee the anonymity of the contribution. The Reviewer expresses their evaluation by returning the evaluation form within 30 days from the day of the assignment. The Directors may proceed to replace the evaluator if the judgment is not expressed within the allocated timeframe.
20. Following peer review, via digital communication from the Editorial Secretariat, the Author receives the evaluation form containing the opinion anonymized by the editorial staff. If the evaluator votes in favour of publication without modifications, the contribution is advanced to publication. If the evaluator votes in favour of publication subject to modifications, the resulting remarks are transmitted to the Author. Should the Author decide to comply with them, they resubmit the contribution to the Editorial Secretariat which, based on instructions received from the Directors, may decide whether to forward it again to the evaluator or proceed directly to publication. In the event of a positive final evaluation, the contribution is advanced to publication; otherwise, the Directors decide whether to reject the contribution or proceed to a further review phase. If the evaluator expresses a negative opinion, the contribution is not published.
21. If a member of the Editorial Board is an Author or co-author of a contribution proposed for publication, the procedures provided by the standard model are followed.
22. Should a reconsideration of the evaluation be requested, the decision rests with the Editorial Board, which may also consult members of the Scientific Committee. If a member of the Editorial Board is an Author or co-author of a contribution proposed for publication, the decision rests with a committee of three members of the Scientific Committee chosen by lot.
Title IV – Practices Contrary to Scientific Integrity and Supervisory Policies for Ethical Aspects of Research Practice
Practices Contrary to Scientific Integrity
23. The Journal, in adherence to the European Code of Conduct for Research Integrity (2023, developed by All European Academies - ALLEA), is committed to countering practices contrary to scientific integrity, such as the fabrication of research data (developing fake research data), falsification (manipulating research tools and suppressing results without justification), and plagiarism (i.e., the reproduction of already published works without quotation marks and/or mention of the source).
24. In addition, the Journal is committed to countering any other unacceptable practice including, but not limited to, the undeclared use of artificial intelligence in drafting the manuscript, the denigration of other researchers within the manuscript, and the republication of one’s own content without citing the originals (so-called self-plagiarism).
25. Without prejudice to civil, criminal, and administrative-accounting liabilities, misconduct and violations of good practice in research are to be considered violations of this Code of Ethics.
26. Anyone who detects the existence of misconduct in research activities or in the decision-making procedures by a member of the editorial bodies, an Author, a Reviewer, or any subject operating within the scope of the Journal shall report the factual circumstances, accompanied by appropriate evidence, to the Editorial Secretariat through a specific digital communication addressed to redazione.antologiadp@gmail.com. The Editorial Secretariat will promptly communicate it to the Directors.
27. Antologia di Diritto Pubblico is committed to protecting anyone who, in good faith, reports behaviour believed to be improper in the conduct of research, in compliance with specific legislation (“Whistleblowing”).
28. The Editorial Board conducts a preliminary investigation into the alleged misconduct. Where it considers the reported behaviours to be substantiated, it will carry out the following duties:
- if the accused subject is a member of the Editorial Board, they will be called to discuss before the Scientific Committee and provide clarifications on the conduct held;
- if the accused subject is a member of the Scientific Committee or the Editorial Secretariat, they will be called to discuss before the Editorial Board and provide clarifications on the conduct held;
- if the accused subject is an Author, they will be called to discuss before the Editorial Board and provide clarifications on the conduct held;
- if the accused subject is a Reviewer, they will be called to discuss before the Editorial Board and provide clarifications on the conduct held.
Oversight for Ethical Aspects of Research Practices
29. All editorial bodies of the Journal commit to monitoring compliance with the ethical principles of scientific research integrity by organizing, in collaboration with sector associations, meetings and initiatives on good practice in research planning and execution, and on the publication and dissemination of results according to international best practices and standards.
Title V – Conflict of Interest
Definitions and Conduct
30. A conflict of interest occurs when conditions arise that could, even potentially, affect the impartiality and independence of subjects involved in various capacities in the Journal’s decision-making processes, particularly within the evaluation and publication process of submitted contributions.
31. A conflict of interest may exist if a member of the editorial bodies, an Author, or a Reviewer has personal or financial relationships that could influence their behaviour in terms of judgment, pressure, or evaluations. This conflict may exist even if the individual believes that such relationships do not influence them.
32. The involvement of one’s own interests or those of one’s spouse, relatives and/or in-laws up to the second degree, or subjects with whom an established relationship exists from which a mutual interest of a financial or non-financial nature could arise, is considered relevant for the purposes of a conflict of interest. A conflict of interest can be of a financial nature (where there is a financial link influencing the research), personal (in the presence of personal convictions affecting the method followed), or professional (when a potential professional advantage influences the decision-making procedure in the journal).
Procedures for Managing Conflicts of Interest
33. The journal implements mechanisms to periodically collect information on potential conflicts of interest from members of all editorial bodies, annually or upon appointment or reconfirmation. This information includes roles held in other competing journals or periodicals and institutional affiliations. Alongside this tool, conflicts of interest are managed by the Journal through a clear and transparent definition of duties and responsibilities and the implementation of internal procedures.
34. In particular, in case of doubt regarding a potential conflict of interest arising before or after publication, a panel formed by three members of the Editorial Board will issue a reasoned decision and communicate it to the parties involved in the conflict. If the conflict concerns the Editorial Board, a panel composed of three members of the Scientific Committee intervenes on the matter.
Title VI – Publication Policies, Copyright, Content Accessibility, and Policies on the Acquisition of Consents and Licenses to Publish; Visibility of Post-Publications Debate
Publication Policies, Copyright, Content Accessibility
35. All contributions to Antologia di Diritto Pubblico are published in compliance with Italian copyright legislation (Law 633/1941 and subsequent amendments).
36. The Journal does not charge Authors any submission, processing, and publication fees.
37. To ensure the accessibility of published articles and the circulation of knowledge within the scientific community and civil society, while ensuring authorship credit, the Journal complies with the principles of Open Access (OA) by monitoring compliance with the Berlin Declaration and the Messina Declaration.
38. Authors retain the rights to their work and authorize and grant the University of Trento publishing house the right to publish the digital edition, under the Creative Commons CC BY-SA 4.0 license, on the TESeO platform (Trento Editions Service for Open science) according to the Open Access principle established in the University Statute and Open Science Policy.
39. After publication, Authors retain the right to republish the article in PDF format on institutional repositories and websites (e.g., IRIS), private websites, blogs, servers, social networks, newsletters. The article shall however maintain the original graphic structure and layout of the Journal, making explicit reference to the Antologia di Diritto Pubblico website via a hypertext link.
40. Authors retain the rights to their work and authorize and grant the University of Trento publishing house the right to publish the digital edition, under the Creative Commons CC BY-SA 4.0 license, on the TESeO platform (Trento Editions Service for Open science) according to the Open Access principle established in the University Statute and Open Science Policy. The bodies of the Journal monitor compliance with the Berlin Declaration and the Messina Declaration.
41. Unpublished articles accepted for publication in the Journal shall not be subject to pre-publication in any form, for example during the submission of the proposal or proofs, on any website or media outlet.
42. The reproduced classic works are, as a rule, subject to the public domain regime. Should third-party rights still exist on the classic works, these will be reproduced through the license conditions permitted by the third-party right holders.
43. The republication of contributions and classic works follows the rules of the respective Creative Commons license.
44. The journal complies with legal principles regarding the protection of personal data.
45. Data obtained by the members of the bodies shall be processed by them in compliance with the legislation in force (EU Reg. 2016/679 General Data Protection Regulation – GDPR and subsequent modifications and integrations), and solely for purposes inherent to the management of the Journal, to support the circulation of knowledge, and to encourage the transfer of technical-scientific results.
Policies on the Acquisition of Consents and Licences
46. For each issue, the editorial staff prepares a standardized template for the acquisition of the necessary consents and licenses from the Authors for the publication and open access distribution under a CC BY-SA license of their works.
Subsequent Debate
47. To promote the visibility of the post-publication debate, the editorial staff commits to set up and update a space on the Journal’s website to host reply notes, letters to the Editor, and news related to events linked to the Journal. To give publicity to notes and letters, the Announcements function of the TESeO publishing platform will also be utilized.
Modifications and Corrections
48. The editorial staff commits to collect reports and requests for modifications or corrections to already-published contributions or parts thereof, and to handle them in a documented and transparent manner for the public in a dedicated section of the Journal’s website. The Authors’ right to withdraw their texts remains unaffected.
