Code of Ethincs

1. Ethical Commitment and International Standards

UDA Law Review strictly adheres to the transparency guidelines and standards established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). This ethical framework comprehensively guides the actions of the editorial board, authors, and peer reviewers to ensure integrity at every stage of the publication process. The editorial team commits to acting with absolute impartiality, evaluating manuscripts solely on their academic merit and methodological rigor, and will investigate any suspected scientific misconduct following international academic integrity protocols.

2. Authorship Responsibilities and Criteria

Regarding authorship responsibility, signatory status is reserved exclusively for those who have made substantial contributions to the study's conceptualization, methodology, or critical drafting. The journal mandates the use of the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT) to detail the participation of each team member (maximum of three authors), prohibiting improper authorship practices. Authors guarantee that the work is original and unpublished, assuming full responsibility for the accuracy and reliability of the submitted content under Chicago 18th ed. citation standards.

3. Academic Integrity and Plagiarism Prevention

To ensure the original nature of research, each manuscript is analyzed using Turnitin® specialized software. Any similarity exceeding 20% with other sources (excluding properly referenced bibliographic citations) is considered a potential ethical breach. Plagiarism in all its forms, including duplicate publication or self-plagiarism, leads to immediate article rejection and notification to the authors, potentially resulting in restrictions on future submissions.

4. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Generative artificial intelligence tools are permitted solely as assistance to improve grammatical clarity, coherence, or writing style. Under no circumstances will AI be accepted as an author or co-author, as authorship entails legal and ethical responsibilities that can only be borne by natural persons. Authors are fully responsible for the final content, needing to oversee and edit generated outputs to prevent errors, bias, or incomplete information.

Mandatory Disclosure:

Any use of these technologies must be declared at the time of initial submission. This disclosure must be included in the manuscript in a dedicated section titled "Generative AI Use Disclosure", placed immediately before the reference list. This policy does not apply to basic spelling checkers or reference management tools.

Suggested Disclosure Format:

"During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [Name of Tool/Service] in order to [Specify reason: improve readability, edit style, etc.]. Following the use of this tool, the content was thoroughly reviewed and edited by the author(s), who take full responsibility for the accuracy and content of the published article."

Editorial Restrictions: To safeguard the confidentiality of unpublished research and copyright, UDA Law Review strictly prohibits the use of generative AI by peer reviewers or editorial board members during the evaluation and arbitration process.

5. Double-Blind Peer Review Process

External reviewers perform their work under a double-blind system, maintaining strict confidentiality regarding received documents. Evaluation must be technical, constructive, and free of personal bias, committing to deliver reports within approximately 45 days. Reviewers are obligated to alert the Editorial Board to any suspected conflict of interest or integrity breaches detected during the peer review process, ensuring the journal's scientific quality.

6. Retractions, Error Management, and Inclusion

UDA Law Review reserves the right to withdraw or retract published articles if severe ethical violations, data manipulation, or plagiarism are subsequently proven. In the case of inadvertent errors that do not invalidate research conclusions, the journal will issue an erratum permanently linked to the original document. Authors and reviewers must declare any conflicts of interest that could compromise evaluation objectivity or study results. Neutral and inclusive language is encouraged. In legal writing, collective terms are preferred to reflect the diversity of the scientific community.

7. San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) Commitment

In alignment with Universidad del Azuay's academic integrity principles, UDA Law Review formally adheres to the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA). As part of this commitment, the journal adopts the following responsible evaluation policies:

  • Scientific Content Priority: Peer review and publication decisions are strictly based on the manuscript's quality, originality, methodological rigor, and legal contribution, independent of citation metrics or the author's institution prestige.
  • Responsible Use of Metrics: The journal rejects journal-based metrics (such as Impact Factors) as a sole surrogate measure of the quality of individual research articles or author contributions.
  • Evaluation Transparency: We foster deep and transparent qualitative assessment, providing authors with constructive feedback that strengthens scientific communication in the field of Law.