Retraction and Correction Policy

The Editorial Board of the “Ukrainian Journal of Constitutional Law” is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). This Policy establishes clear procedures for issuing corrections, publishing expressions of concern, and executing full manuscript retractions to preserve the trustworthiness of the scholarly record.

1. General Principles

A published scientific article constitutes a permanent part of the academic record. The Editorial Board bears ultimate responsibility for safeguarding the integrity and authenticity of published works. In cases of significant errors, ethical breaches, or honest oversights, the Editorial Board takes prompt formal action to amend or retract the publication.

2. Action Levels and Grounds

The Journal applies a three-tiered response mechanism in strict accordance with international COPE protocols:

• 1. Corrections (Erratum / Corrigendum):
  • Erratum (publisher error) – issued to correct technical, typographical, or layout errors introduced by the Editorial Office that alter the interpretation of specific data without invalidating the overall conclusions.
  • Corrigendum (author error) – issued to correct minor factual or bibliographic errors made by the author that do not compromise the scientific validity of the findings.
• 2. Expression of Concern:

  A formal notice published when:

  • The Editorial Board receives credible evidence of research misconduct or data unreliability, but the investigation remains ongoing and requires additional time;
  • The evidence gathered is inconclusive, yet the Editorial Board deems it necessary to alert the scientific community to potential issues within the paper.
• 3. Full Retraction:

  A formal retraction of a published paper is executed in cases of severe misconduct, including:

  • Evidence of plagiarism, inappropriate attribution, or self-plagiarism (duplicate submission/publication);
  • Fabrication or falsification of scientific data, empirical materials, legal statutes, or judicial citations;
  • Undisclosed material conflicts of interest that fundamentally undermine the objectivity of the study;
  • Copyright infringement or unauthorized use of restricted/confidential data;
  • Identification of major calculation or scientific errors that entirely invalidate the conclusions.

3. Submission Channels and Initiating Parties

All official applications, complaints, and notifications regarding errors or academic integrity breaches must be submitted directly to the Editor-in-Chief via email: editor@constjournal.com.

The submission requirements depend on the party initiating the request:

A) Author-Initiated Retractions:

Authors seeking to retract their published paper must submit an official written request to the Editor-in-Chief containing the following information:

• Exact title of the article, digital object identifier (DOI), issue number, and year of publication.
• A detailed and substantiated explanation of the reasons for retraction (describing the identified errors or circumstances that necessitate the retraction).
• Written consent of ALL co-authors for the retraction. Consent must be provided as a signed scanned statement (PDF format) or via direct confirmation sent from the official/institutional email addresses of all co-authors listed upon submission.

Note: In the event of a dispute among co-authors regarding a retraction, the Editorial Board will conduct an independent evaluation to resolve the matter objectively.

B) Third-Party Initiated Retractions (Readers, Reviewers, Institutions):

Third parties reporting alleged plagiarism, falsification, duplicate publication, or other misconduct in the Journal must submit a formal complaint to editor@constjournal.com including:

• Article title, author name(s), and DOI of the paper in question.
• A clear and detailed account of the alleged breach.
• Verifiable evidence: in cases of plagiarism, links/citations to original works with text comparison tables; in cases of data falsification, original sources, statutory references, or calculations refuting the published findings.
• Applicant’s contact details for further communication.

Note: Anonymous reports will only be evaluated if supported by unequivocal, self-evident documentary proof that can be independently verified without contacting the complainant.

4. Investigation and Decision-Making Procedure

1. Acknowledgment and Initial Screening: Within 5 business days of receipt, the Editor-in-Chief acknowledges the submission and conducts an initial formal review.
2. Investigation & Communication:
   • The investigation process takes up to 30 calendar days.
   • For third-party complaints, the Editorial Board notifies the authors and invites them to provide a written response and supporting evidence within 14 calendar days.
3. Decision-Making:
   • All evidence, author responses, and documentation are submitted to the Editorial Board for formal review.
   • The Editorial Board issues an official written recommendation.
   • The final decision regarding a correction, expression of concern, or full retraction is rendered by the Editor-in-Chief based on the Editorial Board’s ruling.

5. Technical Workflow and DOI Preservation

In accordance with international indexing standards (Scopus, Web of Science, Crossref):

• A retracted paper is never completely removed from the Journal’s website or digital archives.
• The digital object identifier (DOI) remains active and continues to resolve to the article landing page.
• An official Retraction Note detailing the reasons, initiating party, decision date, and a reference to the Editorial Board’s ruling is published on the article page.
• The original PDF file is replaced with a revised version featuring a prominent, translucent «RETRACTED» watermark across every page.

6. Third-Party Notifications and Consequences

Upon issuing a retraction, the Editorial Board formally notifies the author(s), international indexing services (Scopus, Web of Science), Crossref, and relevant library catalogs.

In proven cases of severe plagiarism, data falsification, or gross breaches of academic integrity, the Editorial Board reserves the right to formally inform the author’s home institution or the research funding agency.