Periodicojs Academic Editor is committed to the standard of quality and ethical behavior in all phases of the evaluation and publication process of the works received, based on the “Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors” of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), available at following link: https://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf.
Furthermore, we expect commitment from authors in line with the commitments made by editors and reviewers to this statement below:

I - Duties of Editors:

1) Publication decisions: It is up to the editors to choose which submitted and evaluated articles should or should not be published in each edition. The editor will be guided by the editorial board's policy, in addition to taking into account legal requirements, seeking to avoid plagiarism, copyright and human rights violations;

2) Selection of articles: Articles will be evaluated according to their interdisciplinary perspective and also relevant social contribution. The publisher will also include works that deal mainly with the theme of interdisciplinarity that covers the topic of discussion of gender and law. Furthermore, the publisher will not evaluate your works based on ideological, religious or political assumptions that may impede freedom of expression and the production of scientific knowledge;

3) Confidentiality: The editors and editorial team undertake not to disclose any information about the manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author;

4) Disclosure of conflicts of interest: editors undertake not to use unpublished materials published in works submitted to the publisher, without the prior written consent of the research authors;

II - Duties of referees

1) Contribution to editorial decisions: Reviewers assume the role of assisting the editor in making editorial decisions, through dialogue with editors and suggestions to authors, in order to improve the work to be published.

2) Punctuality: Evaluators undertake to inform the editor in advance when they feel unable to analyze a specific research or if it is impossible to meet the deadline received.

3) Confidentiality: The works received are confidential for the evaluators. Therefore, they cannot be displayed or discussed with third parties, with the exception of publishers.

4) Standards of objectivity: Evaluators undertake to write their opinions objectively and clearly, seeking to use arguments that justify and support their evaluation, thus avoiding value judgments, inappropriate expressions or personal criticism.

5) Recognition of sources: The reviewer must identify situations in which mention is made of relevant works published in the text, but which were not properly cited, as well as any type of irregularity in the way authors are cited. Furthermore, to avoid copyright infringement, the reviewer must be aware of the possibility of plagiarism, in order to avoid any similarity between the evaluated work and the published work.

6) Disclosure and conflict of interest: Any privileged information or ideas from the works evaluated are confidential and cannot be used for the personal benefit of the evaluator.

III. Authors' duties:

1) Reporting of rules and procedures: authors undertake to present an accurate report with an objective analysis of their research and significance;

2) Accuracy of data and information in the manuscript: the article must present sufficient details and references to enable future consultations and verification of published data, so that fraudulent or intentionally inaccurate statements are considered unethical and grounds for rejection of the work.

3) Originality and plagiarism: authors must write original works, therefore, they undertake not to use other works without proper citation or reference, as improper use of the citation will cause the work to be rejected.

4) Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication: authors cannot publish works simultaneously in more than one journal, therefore, the detection of multiple publication will result in the rejection of the work.

5) Acknowledgment of sources: the authors undertake to cite all references that influenced them in the production of their work.

6) Authorship of the article: only those who contributed in a relevant way to the execution of the work must be authors, all listed as co-authors, therefore, all those considered co-authors must be listed in the system at the time of submitting the work. Furthermore, all co-authors must approve the publication and have their name on the final work.

7) Disclosure and conflict of interest: the authors undertake to report any conflict of interest, financial, professional or of any substantial nature that could be interpreted as interfering with the result of their evaluation. In addition Therefore, authors must disclose the sources of financial support, if they have received it.

8) Fundamental errors in published works: in the case of any type of error, the author must inform the editors for correction and collaborate with them for retraction or adjustment.

Any author wishing to publish their work must agree with this statement in all its items in order to guarantee the quality of the work