Policies

The journal adheres to the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE) principles and good practices for transparency in academic publications.

Regarding authors

1. The authors must state the originality and clarity of the article, the veracity of data, as well as the validity of the study and its relevance in relation with the scope of the journal.
2. They must know the guidelines for them and comply with them completely.
3. Manifest any interest conflict relevant for all the contributors, would there be any.
4. Communicate to the editor if any of the individuals should not review the sent material as long as those requests are explained, reasonable and viable.
5. Know the dates of publication of the journal, as well as the deadlines for sending and acceptance of articles.
6. Authors can appeal against any of the editorial decisions.

Regarding reviewers

1. The review of the manuscripts is done under a blind peer modality and its made by experts, it is also based on the international double system that ensures that the review complies with anonymity standards, i.e. that nor the authors or reviewers know the identity of each other in order to avoid biases in the process.
2. The reviewers must manifest if there is any conflict of interest, which can occur as a result of proximity or troubles with the authors or their positions, likewise when the reviewers identify the authors despite the removal of their names from the sent manuscript. The reviewers must warn the editor whenever this happens and reject the invitation to evaluate the article.
3. Every author must comply with copyrights.
4. The reviewers must check over their articles within the time assigned by the journal in order to observe the deadlines out of respect for the authors and their work as for a display of compromise with the journal.
5. The reviewer must keep absolute confidentiality in the review of the manuscript and has no permission whatsoever of communicating its contents to third parties.
6. The opinion of the reviewers is vital for detecting the originality of the content and guaranteeing the scientific and literary quality of the article.
7. The reviewers must contain an exhaustive critical analysis of the manuscript that contrasts the stated information, checks the pertinence of the scientific literature used and gives a qualitative and quantitative report about the suitability of the text submitted for publishing regarding the academic nature of the journal.
8. The reviewers must express issues regarding ethical problems or any inadequate research or publishing practices that might emerge from the submitted material.

Regarding the editor

1. The editor must ensure the quality of the material published in the journal.
2. Its selection selection of peer experts with knowledge, experience and academic trajectory in the field, with no interest conflicts, is one of its key functions.
3. The editor must compromise with copyrights compliance.
4. Its determined dedications towards guaranteeing the confidentiality and anonymity of authors and reviewers during the whole process, as with everything related to informed consents and special requirements for research in human being and animals.
5. The editor must publish correction, clarifications, erratas and excuses whenever necessary.
6. Among its duties it is also actively gathering points of view from authors, reader, reviewers and members of the committee and/or editorial boards from other journals about possible ways of improving its publishing processes.
7. Must observe the deadlines declared for the publication of an article that passed all the stages of the editing process.
8. Shall identify, select and review the composition of the members of the scientific editorial committee according to the experience and academic trajectory of its members.
9. Must commit her or himself to using systems for the detection of false data, both by routine use or those coming from plagiarism suspicion. For the verifying of these points, the journal Opinión Jurídica uses the Turnitin anti-plagiarism software with which it is possible to determine the similarities between an article and other documents and publications.