PUBLICATION POLICY

ERUHFD journal comply COPE ( Committee on Publication Ethics ) and YOK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES

• Erciyes University is the owner and publisher of the journal. ERÜHFD is published within the university’s Faculty of Law.
• Current information about the editor-in-chief, responsible director and journal boards is provided in the masthead and the editorial boards page.
• ERÜHFD is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal published twice a year, in April and October. Current listings are provided on the Indexes page.
• The journal includes studies that undergo peer review (research articles, review articles, case reviews, theoretical articles, method articles, translated articles) in accordance with ANSI/NISO Z39.96-2015 JATS standards and definitions, as well as non-peer-reviewed studies (book reviews, legislative evaluations, legislative translations, letters to the editor, editorial notes, abstracts, opinions, letters, clinical studies, and informative notes, along with correction and retraction articles). The acceptance or rejection of works of this nature is made by the Publication Commission. It is stated at the beginning of every article whether peer review has been conducted. The corresponding author recommends the type of the relevant study, but the final decision is made by the relevant editor or field editor.
• All responsibilities that may arise from the opinions expressed in the studies published in the journal belong to the authors.
• Articles published in our journal must comply with research and publication ethics of the journal. Authors who submit their works to the journal have the obligation to comply with the policies of ERUHFD.
• Copyright remains with the authors. Authors grant the journal non-exclusive permission for first publication, reproduction, distribution, access and archiving in print and electronic formats. The work is published under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0). Non-commercial sharing and adaptation are permitted with appropriate credit, a link to the licence and an indication of changes; uses permitted by the licence do not require separate journal permission. Authors may share the published version in personal or institutional repositories with attribution to the first publication and its DOI where available. Any separate print agreement must not restrict open access or rights already granted under this licence.
• Authors are not paid royalties or any sort of payment.
• Our journal supports open access and free access to information in compliance with DOAJ, COPE, OASPA and YOK principles.

EVALUATION AND PUBLICATION PROCESS

Submission of Articles to the Journal:

• Submission of Articles to the Journal: Studies requested for publication must be submitted via the DergiPark system by January 31 for the April issue and by July 31 for the October issue. The total number of articles we take into the process for each issue is limited to 60, including processes carried over from the previous issue. Article acceptance will be closed if the quota is filled before the deadline.

Preliminary Review Stage:

• Works uploaded to the system are subjected to a preliminary review by the secretariat regarding compliance with the journal writing rules. This stage is completed within 7 days from submission. Time spent waiting for corrections from the author is excluded; the notification date and the date the corrected file is returned are recorded in the system.
• Works that complete the preliminary review undergo within 7 days an initial evaluation by the editorial board, and works deemed unsuitable for publication are returned to the author. The period starts when the secretariat completes its preliminary review and forwards the manuscript to the editorial office; assignment or a change of editor does not restart it.
• As a rule, all articles are transferred to the relevant section editor as a result of the editorial review.
• At the end of the preliminary review stage, our journal sends the similarity report generated by one of the plagiarism programs (Ithenticate) to the reviewers. The similarity rate in the articles must not exceed 30% (excluding similarity under 7 words, citations, and bibliography).
• Manuscripts with a similarity rate above 30% are sent back to the author for final corrections. Works resubmitted to the journal in this case are re-evaluated based on the initial application process. In the possibility that the similarity rate exceeds 30% again, the article will be rejected for publication in the journal.
• Where necessary, the Turnitin AI detection tool may be used if the language and technical characteristics of the manuscript are supported. The report is not conclusive evidence and must not be the sole basis for rejection or a finding of an ethical violation. It is assessed together with the author’s explanation and other concrete evidence. If use outside the author’s disclosure is established, the editor will reject the manuscript. The author may submit the manuscript again as a new submission. Permitted uses and disclosure obligations for authors, editors and reviewers are set out in the Artificial Intelligence Use Policy.

Peer Reviewer Appointment Process:

• The process of determining and appointing reviewers begins for articles that successfully complete the preliminary review process. The reviewer determination and appointment process is completed within 60 days. The reviewer selection and appointment period starts when the editorial office determines that the manuscript is suitable for peer review and ends when the two required reviewers accept their invitations. If reviewers cannot be secured within this period, the editor records the delay and the next action, informs the author and, where necessary, obtains the author’s consent to continue for the next issue.
• Studies are sent for evaluation to two (blind) reviewers, higher in academic rank than the author, chosen from a board of reviewers whose names are kept confidential.
• To maintain the blind peer review system, authors' names, including embedded author information in the document, are anonymized.
• Reviewers are expected to accept or decline the invitation sent through DergiPark within 10 days. If no response is received within this period, the section editor may review and cancel the invitation. If the invitation is declined or cancelled, another reviewer is invited.

Reviewer Evaluation Process:

• Reviewers are given 20 days from acceptance of the invitation to complete their assessment. Where necessary, the total review period may be extended to a maximum of 40 days, including all extensions. These periods apply separately to each review round; extensions do not change the starting date of that round.
• Works reported by reviewers as “publishable directly (as is)” are published by our journal.
• For manuscripts where reviewers report 'publishable after revisions,' evaluations are conveyed to the author(s) and revisions are requested. Authors are given 14 days for minor revisions and 30 days for major revisions from notification of the revision request through DergiPark. If revisions cannot be completed within these periods, one or more extensions totalling no more than 30 additional days may be granted upon the author(s)' request. The reason and definite final deadline for each extension are recorded in the system. If deficiencies are not completed within the given periods, it is assumed that the author(s) have withdrawn their article, and the manuscript is removed from the publication process after the editor checks the notifications and extensions granted; the author is informed and the action is recorded in the system.
• When submitting a revision, respond point by point to each reviewer. For each point, state the change made and its page or section in the manuscript. If you have not followed a suggestion, explain why. The response file must not contain names, affiliations or other identifying information. Check reviewer attachments as well; notify the editor if an attachment is inaccessible.
• If one of the reviewers reports “not publishable” while the other reports it as publishable, the work is sent to a third reviewer.
• If both reviewers report “not publishable”, the work is returned to the author and removed from the publication process.
• If the article evaluation process cannot be completed in the issue to which the article was submitted, authors are informed via DergiPark. If the authors accept continuing the process for the next issue, the process continues for the next issue. September 20 for the October issue and March 20 for the April issue are the deadlines for completing peer review, author revision and the editor’s acceptance decision. Subsequent typesetting and proof checks follow the publication schedule for that issue. Submission by the deadline does not guarantee publication in that issue.

Complaint Policy:

• Any objection to articles published in the journal should be made to eruhukukdergisi@gmail.com, the chief editor, or the technical editor.
• After assessing whether the complaint and its grounds constitute a criminal element or find correspondence in the COPE flowchart, the decision is made by the editorial board with a majority vote.
• The reasoned outcome of the complaint is communicated to the complainant and the relevant author(s) within 30 days. If the investigation cannot be completed within this period, the reason for the delay and the expected response date are communicated within the same period. Absence of notification does not constitute rejection of the complaint.
  
   

Corrections, Retractions and Exceptional Removal:

• Authors may report errors in published work and request a correction or retraction. Retaining copyright does not confer a unilateral right to erase the published scholarly record.
• The editorial board decides on corrections, expressions of concern or retractions after considering the parties’ explanations and concrete evidence under the COPE Retraction Guidelines.
• A retraction notice states the reason clearly and is linked to and from the article. To preserve the scholarly record, the article normally remains accessible with its retracted status clearly marked. Relevant databases are notified.
• Removal of the full text is limited to exceptional grounds such as a legal requirement, a serious privacy/personal data violation or comparable circumstances. Where possible, the article’s bibliographic record and the reason for removal remain accessible.
• Requests for correction or retraction are submitted through DergiPark or to eruhukukdergisi@gmail.com with the article details and reasons. The authors concerned are invited to respond; the notification periods in the complaints policy apply. The reasoned decision is recorded, including any disagreement among the authors.
• Limited errors are addressed through a correction notice. Errors undermining reliability, plagiarism, redundant publication, unethical research or manipulated peer review may warrant retraction. An expression of concern is considered while serious concerns remain unresolved. The purpose is to correct the scholarly record.

Corrections:

• Significant errors are addressed through a correction notice explaining the change and linking to the article. If the text is updated, version and change information is made clear; relevant databases are notified.
• When pre-publication proofs are sent to the author through DergiPark, the author must submit correction requests within 3 working days following notification. The definite deadline is stated in the notice. This period applies to proof checking and does not replace the time allowed for scholarly revision.
  
   

ETHICAL PRINCIPLES

Principles for Authors:

• Anyone over the age of 18 can submit their legal studies to our journal. Our authors must write in accordance with the writing rules.
• All our authors must have an ORCID ID and submit it with the application.
• The statuses of our journal's advisory, publication, editorial boards, or current/former employees of Erciyes University Faculty of Law are shown in the conflict of interest section at the end of the article. Articles of individuals actively involved in the Erciyes University Faculty of Law Journal boards and the relevant issue are not published.
• More than one study by an author is not published in the same issue.
• Works submitted by authors must be original and not previously published. Authors must declare that the work is not currently under review in another journal.
• All authors must make a substantial scholarly contribution to activities such as research design, examination of literature and cases, analysis, drafting or revision; approve the final text; and accept responsibility for its accuracy and integrity. Contributions are reported using the form’s activities and CRediT roles, with the contributing authors’ percentages totalling 100% for each activity.
• Authors must inform the editorial board if they discover a significant error in their published article.
• Authors must submit ethics committee approval to the journal for studies requiring ethics committee approval. If “Ethics Committee Approval” is required for the research; information regarding the Ethics Committee approval (name of the ethics committee, number and date of the approval document) must be stated in the article.
• By submitting the work, the author commits that it is prepared in accordance with Law No. 5846 on Intellectual and Artistic Works, the YOK Scientific Research and Publication Ethics Directive, and the research and publication ethics standards announced by COPE.

Principles for Editors:

• Editors, field editors, secretary and assistant editors within the journal are obligated to perform their duties objectively and impartially, free from all biases.
• Editors, field editors, secretary and assistant editors within the journal are obligated to act confidentially to the extent required by their duties.
• Editors, field editors, secretary and assistant editors within the journal collaborate fully in all journal-related operations and transactions. Fair task distribution within the journal constitutes the essence of this collaboration.
• Editors, field editors, secretary and assistant editors, as rule, cannot publish their studies when they are actively working in the current issue.

Principles for Reviewers:

• All articles should be evaluated fairly based on the scientific content of the work, regardless of the author's gender, ethnic origin, race, religion, or political values.
• Reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and not share information about the evaluated work or the review process and its aftermath with third parties.
• Reviewer evaluations should be objective, constructive, and not hostile or provocative, and should not contain demeaning personal comments.
• If a conflict of interest is observed during the review process, the situation should be reported to the Editor board.
• Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
• The relevant editor does not have the authority to interfere with the opinions of reviewers. As long as the tone, used words, and expressions do not constitute a crime according to the Turkish Penal Code (insult, threat, etc.), no edits are made to the reviewer opinions. For expressions constituting a crime, the editor has the right not to forward the reviewer's opinion to the author(s). The relevant editor can only notify the reviewer about the style of the reviewer opinions and request changes from the reviewer. Reviewers freely determine their decisions on the change request.

Conflict of Interest:

• A conflict of interest is a financial, professional, academic or personal relationship that could influence, or appear to influence, the work or its assessment. Examples include funding, paid consultancy or legal representation, institutional ties, collaboration, thesis supervision, competition and close personal relationships.
• At submission, authors disclose the nature and time period of relevant current or past relationships in the Ethics and Conflict of Interest Declaration Form, and the funder’s role in the research, writing and decision to publish. Absence of conflicts must be stated explicitly. Changes must be reported promptly to the editorial office. The declaration is published at the end of the article; identifying details are anonymized in the version sent to reviewers. Disclosure alone is not a reason for rejection.
• Editors, section editors and other staff involved in the process disclose their own conflicts to the editor-in-chief before assignment or as soon as they become aware of them. They do not participate in reviewer selection, assessment or decisions on the manuscript. The manuscript is assigned to an editor without a conflict. If the editor-in-chief has a conflict, the assignment is made by editorial board members without a conflict. The existing restriction on active board members publishing in the relevant issue remains in force.
• Reviewers disclose potential conflicts to the editor before accepting an invitation and decline assignments where a relationship prevents impartial assessment. If a conflict becomes apparent later, they suspend the review and notify the editor, who appoints an independent reviewer where necessary.
• Institutional or financial interests of the publisher and journal management must not influence scholarly decisions. Disclosures, recusals and replacement assignments are recorded in the submission record with due regard for confidentiality.
• Conflicts disclosed later or found to have been omitted are investigated under the complaints procedure, with an opportunity for those concerned to respond. Incomplete declarations are corrected; compromised assessment is reviewed independently. The retraction policy applies if the reliability of the content is seriously affected. A conflict alone does not automatically warrant retraction.

FEE POLICY

• No fees are charged from authors for articles submitted to our journal.
• No fees are paid by our journal to reviewers involved in the article evaluation processes and authors whose articles are published.
• Any advertising in our journal is prohibited.
• Our journal supports free publication, free editorship, free authorship, open access, and free information access on a voluntary basis, in compliance with DOAJ, COPE, and OASPA principles.
  
   

OPEN ACCESS AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY POLICY

• Our journal has an open access policy that is compatible with DOAJ COPE and OASPA principles.
• Works are openly available under CC BY-NC 4.0, with copyright retained by the authors. The licence permits non-commercial sharing and adaptation with appropriate credit, a licence link and an indication of changes.

ARCHIVING

• Erciyes University Faculty of Law Review is committed to the long-term preservation and perpetual access of its published content. For this purpose, all articles and issues published in our journal are digitally archived on the following platforms:
• Journal's Own Website: All published content is permanently accessible and archived on the journal's official website at hukukdergi.erciyes.edu.tr.
• National Library of Turkey (Milli Kütüphane): Our journal is archived by the National Library of the Republic of Turkey as part of the legal deposit processes.
• TR Dizin: Our journal is indexed and archived on the ULAKBİM TR Dizin platform.
• Dergipark: Our journal, along with all its issues and articles, is archived on the Dergipark academic publishing platform hosted by TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM.
• This archiving policy contributes to the continuity of scholarly knowledge by preventing the loss of academic works and offers reliable access to resources for researchers.