Retraction & Withdrawal Policy

Journal editors do not possess autonomous authority to determine the publication of submitted manuscripts. Decisions regarding publication are made in accordance with the editorial policies established by the journal’s editorial board and are subject to prevailing legal requirements concerning defamation, copyright infringement, duplicate publication, and plagiarism. Once published, articles shall remain accessible, unchanged, and accurate to the fullest extent possible. However, in exceptional circumstances, a published article may necessitate withdrawal or, in rare cases, complete removal. Such measures shall only be undertaken under extraordinary conditions.

Article Retraction

Retraction of a published article may be initiated by journal editors, the authors, or their affiliated institutions. In specific cases, a retraction must be accompanied by a formal statement of apology for the inaccuracies and/or an acknowledgment of those who identified the errors. The retraction of a scientific article must include a declaration that the original work is no longer valid and that its data and conclusions should not be utilized as a foundation for future research.

Article Withdrawal

An article may be withdrawn if it is determined that the initial version contains substantive errors or has been inadvertently submitted more than once—either to Constitutional Review (ConsRev) and/or to another publisher. Additionally, withdrawal may be necessary in cases of violations of ethical standards in academic publishing, such as duplicate submissions, misrepresentation of authorship, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication, or other forms of academic misconduct. Should an author become aware of an ethical breach, they may request the withdrawal of their article by submitting a formal letter of withdrawal to the editorial board of ConsRev.

Article Retraction

Retraction is conducted when a published article is found to be in violation of scientific ethical codes, including but not limited to duplicate submissions, misrepresentation of authorship, plagiarism, self-plagiarism, falsification of data, or fraudulent authorship. Furthermore, a retraction may be issued to rectify errors in submission or publication, as deemed necessary by the editorial board of ConsRev. The retraction process follows these mechanisms:

1. If a violation of scientific ethical standards is identified prior to publication, the manuscript shall be returned to the author along with a formal retraction letter from the Chief Editor.
2. If a violation is discovered post-publication, the following measures may be taken:
   a. A formal retraction notice titled “Retraction: [Article Title]” shall be published in a subsequent issue of the journal, duly signed by the authors and/or editors, and recorded in the journal’s table of contents.
   b. The online version of the article shall be preceded by a screen displaying the retraction notice, which readers must view before accessing the content.
   c. The original article shall remain available in its unaltered form, with the addition of a watermark on each page of the PDF indicating that it has been retracted.
   d. The HTML version of the article shall be removed.

Article Removal: Legal Considerations

In exceptional cases, it may be necessary to remove an article from ConsRev’s online database. Such action shall only be undertaken if the article contains defamatory content, is fraudulent, infringes upon legal rights, is subject to a court order, or poses a threat to national security. In these instances, while the metadata (including the title and authors) shall remain accessible, the full text shall be replaced with a notice stating that the article has been removed due to legal considerations.

Article Replacement

In circumstances where a published article contains inaccuracies that may pose serious risks—such as health hazards—the authors may request the retraction of the original article and its replacement with a revised version. In such cases, the standard retraction procedure shall be followed, with the distinction that a link to the corrected version shall be provided, along with a documented history of modifications.