Code of Ethics

Rivista di diritto internazionale privato e processuale

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

The Code of Ethics of the Rivista di diritto internazionale privato e processuale (RDIPP) complies with the rules set out in the Regulation on the rating of journals in non-bibliometric areas (approved by the ANVUR Board of Governors with resolution No. 42 of 20 February 2019), the ethical rules of conduct, and the standards drawn up by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

In their capacity, the Directors comply with the spirit and the letter of the COPE recommendations in order to take all possible measures against malpractice and to ensure good ethical practices in the publication process. In particular, it is expected that all parties involved – the Directors, the Editorial Board, the Scientific Advisory Board, any other potential Referees, and the Authors – be cognizant of and adhere to the following ethical principles.

Duties of the Directors and of the Editorial Board

The Directors are responsible for deciding whether to publish the contributions submitted to the Journal on the basis of the peer-review process set out hereinafter. In making their decisions, the Directors are bound to respect the standards and editorial line of the Journal. They are also bound by the legal provisions in force on defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

The Directors decide exclusively on the basis of the scientific value, relevance and originality of the content of the contribution regardless of the Author’s gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or else of scientific, academic or political orientation.

The Directors and the Editorial Board undertake not to disclose information concerning the contributions submitted for publication to persons other than the Author, the Scientific Advisory Board and the Editor, and undertake not to use the contents of unpublished contributions for their own research without the express written consent of the Author.

The Directors and the Editorial Board shall ensure that any materials submitted by the Author remain strictly confidential during the peer-review process. The Directors select the Scientific Advisory Board or other Referees on the basis of their competence and reliability, in order to ensure an adequate evaluation of the contribution submitted for publication.

When the Directors and the Editorial Board detect or receive reports of errors or inaccuracies, conflict of interest or plagiarism in a published contribution, they shall promptly notify the Author and the Publisher, and take the necessary steps to clarify the matter. If necessary, the Directors shall withdraw the contribution or publish a retraction.

Documentation relating to the peer-review process carried out for each contribution shall be saved and stored with the Editorial Board.

Duties of the Author

The Author guarantees that the contribution submitted for evaluation is their own product and is unpublished, scientifically original and not simultaneously submitted to other journals, books or periodicals. The contribution may subsequently be published in other journals or books provided the Directors and the Editorial Board are informed and give consent, without prejudice to the Author’s duty to expressly cite the source where the contribution was originally published. The Author shall also adequately cite their bibliography in accordance with the editorial guidelines of the Journal, making sure that the work and/or words of other Authors are adequately paraphrased or quoted verbatim with an appropriate citation of the sources.

The Directors and the Editorial Board may ask the Authors to make corrections and additions deemed appropriate, also in accordance with the anonymous evaluation of the Referees. Notwithstanding the anonymity of the peer-review process, the Directors and the Editorial Board may bring to the Author’s attention the Referee’s assessment in anonymous form. Authors may express their observations or objections, on which the Directors will decide.

The authorship of the work shall be clear: all those who have made a significant contribution to the realization of the contribution shall appear as co-authors.

The author shall not have any conflicts of interest that could have biased the results achieved, the theses sustained or the interpretations proposed. The Author shall also indicate any financial supporters of the research or project from which the contribution derives.

If an Author identifies a significant error or inaccuracy in one of their contributions, they shall promptly inform the Directors and the Editorial Board and provide all information needed to make the necessary amendments. The amendments shall be published either at the end or in the appendix of the contribution. The Author shall also correct the contribution in collaboration with the Directors and the Editorial Board.

By submitting a contribution, the Author agrees that, if it is accepted for publication, all economic rights, without limitation of space and by all means and technologies now existing and/or hereafter developed, will be transferred to the Publisher.

Peer-Review Process

Peer-review is a procedure that assists the Directors assess the scientific quality of the proposed contributions and also allows the Authors to improve their own text.

The review of articles is carried out by Referees, selected by the Directors among the members of the Scientific Advisory Board or other specialists in the field on the basis of their expertise. The review is carried out in the accordance with the standards of ‘double-blind peer-review’: reviewers are unaware of the identity of the authors, and authors are also unaware of the identity of reviewers. There are at least three or more reviewers for the total number of articles in each issue.

All articles are subject to double-blind peer-review, except those published in the Current Events and Recent Developments section or written by one of the Journal’s Directors.

If the member of the Scientific Advisory Board (or any other Referee) believes that they do not have the scientific expertise required to carry out the evaluation or are unable to do so within the allocated time frame, they shall promptly notify the Directors and/or the Editorial Board and forego the review.

The peer-review process shall be carried out in a fair and objective manner. Referees shall justify their assessments of the contribution sent to them in an appropriate and documented manner. Comments shall be technically well formulated and cannot be construed as criticism of an ideological nature or, in any case, contain scientific-cultural assumptions of a personal nature. Each observation or argument reported should be accompanied preferably by pertinent sources and/or documentation. Even in the event that the contribution is deemed to not meet the standards for publication, suggestions with a view to a future publication may be offered to the Author.

The Referee is invited to provide the bibliographic references of basic works that the Author has overlooked in the contribution. If the Referee discovers a substantial similarity or overlap between the contribution under review and any other published material of which they are aware, they shall notify the Directors and/or the Editorial Board. Moreover, the Editorial Board uses anti-plagiarism software to screen for unoriginal material.

Contributions received for review shall be treated as confidential. They shall not be shown to or discussed with anyone absent the prior authorisation of the Directors. Confidential information or indications obtained during the peer-review process shall be treated as fiduciary and confidential: they may not be used for one’s own benefit.

The Referees are required not to accept for evaluation contributions for which a conflict of interest arises due to previous collaboration or competition with the Author (who remains anonymous, but may nevertheless be identifiable) and/or connections with the Authors, entities or institutions associated to the contribution.

Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest may arise when an Author, a member of the Scientific Advisory Board, one of the Directors or any other Referee has personal or economic relationships of such magnitude that they may inappropriately influence their behaviour, in terms of pressure or evaluation. This conflict may exist even if the person considers that such relationships do not influence them. The Author, the member of the Scientific Advisory Board, the Director or any other Referee shall declare any situation of conflict of interest. Where a conflict of interest arises, it is for the Directors to decide accordingly.