Transparência e integridade científica

1.Ethical standards of the Revista Direito Público

The Revista Direito Público follows the norms and recommendations for ethical standards and responsibility in scientific communication established by national and international institutions: COPE, CSE, Equator Network, CNPq, Fapesp and SciELO's Manual of Good Practices for Strengthening Ethics in Scientific Publication.

We highlight the following ethical conduct and standards to be adopted by Revista Direito Público:

Identification of misconduct

After complying with the required formal aspects, Revista Direito Público ensures that all authors proofread and accept responsibility for the content and record their contribution at the end of the article.

Checking for duplication

In order to promote the predominance of originality in its texts, Revista Direito Público has adopted programs to check for duplicates of texts that have already been published. When in doubt, the editor-in-chief contacts the corresponding author. When there is doubt about the inclusion of citations and references, the cited document is checked or requested.

Excessive self-citation by authors

When during the evaluation process, editors or referees identify excessive self-citation by authors and/or the journal, Revista Direito Público will contact the corresponding author for clarification to support decision-making.

Fabrication or falsification of data and images

The fabrication or falsification of data and images is serious misconduct. If there are any doubts in the evaluation process, Revista Direito Público will ask the authors for supporting data on the methodology and results.

Mechanisms to support decisions on misconduct

In cases of doubt and questioning, Revista Direito Público follows COPE's flowcharts for identifying and providing guidance on misconduct. Occasionally, when there is a challenge to the journal's decision, a committee is set up made up of members of the editorial board and those from outside the journal.

Guidance for decision-making on retractions and errata

The article already published in which misconduct has been identified remains published in Revista Direito Público as a retraction. The retraction documents the reason for the retraction duly referenced and can be partial (when the misconduct applies to a specific part of the article, without compromising the whole of the published research) or total. The article will not be “unpublished”.

Errors or faults, regardless of their nature or origin, which do not constitute misconduct, are corrected by means of an erratum, with errata, corrections and retractions being published as soon as possible.

2. Originality and Plagiarism Policy

Authors submitting their work to the journal must ensure the originality and unpublished status of their manuscripts. Ideas, analyses, data, and concepts taken from other sources must be properly cited. RDP considers plagiarism, in all its forms, an unethical practice that conflicts with the journal’s editorial policy.

To ensure the originality of submissions, the journal uses Turnitin plagiarism detection software. The verification process is conducted at two distinct stages:

a) During the initial screening phase (desk review) by the Editorial Board, before the manuscript is sent for peer review;
b) After peer review has been completed and before final publication, if the manuscript is approved.

In addition, if any reviewer raises concerns about possible plagiarism, the manuscript may be subject to a new Turnitin analysis to safeguard the integrity of the editorial process.

If plagiarism or any other unethical behavior—such as the use of false information—is identified, the editors will contact the authors within 7 days to inform them of the issue and request clarification. The information provided will be submitted to the Editorial Board, which will decide on the matter.

If plagiarism is confirmed, the decision will be communicated to all parties within 7 days. The manuscript will be withdrawn from the editorial process or publication (if already published), and the journal will issue a formal retraction.



3. Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

This policy aims to establish normative guidelines regarding the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools by authors, reviewers, editors, and all other parties involved in the editorial process of the Revista de Direito Público (RDP). The objective is to uphold academic ethics, scientific integrity, methodological transparency, and epistemic responsibility in the development and evaluation of submissions to the journal.

3.1 Definition

For the purposes of this policy, "Artificial Intelligence" refers to any computational system employing algorithms, machine learning, neural networks, or natural language models to perform tasks traditionally associated with human cognition, such as writing, reviewing, translating, analyzing, or organizing texts and data.

3.2 Guidelines for Authors

3.2.1 Permitted uses (subject to final human review)

The use of AI tools is permitted solely for the following auxiliary purposes, provided that the final version of the manuscript is critically reviewed and edited by the author(s):

  • Linguistic correction: spelling, grammar, and stylistic improvement;

  • Translation: use of AI-assisted translation tools, provided the final output is thoroughly reviewed by human editors;

  • Formatting: assistance with citation styles, bibliographic references, and document layout according to journal guidelines;

  • Data organization: AI may be used for coding, transcribing, or categorizing empirical data, provided the procedures are fully described in the methodology section and are reproducible.

3.2.2 Prohibited uses

The following uses of AI are strictly prohibited:

  • Substantive content generation: authors may not use AI tools to draft, in whole or in part, any substantial sections of the manuscript, such as the introduction, legal analysis, discussion, or conclusion;

  • Replacement of intellectual authorship: any use of AI that compromises the autonomy of the research or misrepresents the originality of the contribution will be deemed a serious ethical violation.

3.2.3 Mandatory disclosure

Authors must clearly disclose, upon submission, any use of AI tools, even if limited to formal aspects. The disclosure must include:

  • The tools used;

  • The purpose of their use;

  • The extent of the AI’s contribution to the manuscript.

Failure to provide such disclosure will be interpreted as a declaration that no AI tools were used at any stage of the manuscript’s development.

3.3 Guidelines for Reviewers and Editors

  • Reviewers and editors may only use AI tools for technical and auxiliary purposes, such as plagiarism detection or language checks.

  • The use of AI to generate peer reviews, editorial reports, or automated recommendations is strictly prohibited.

  • The integrity, critical judgment, and personal responsibility of peer review must be preserved at all times.

3.4. Misconduct and Sanctions

Noncompliance with this policy shall be considered editorial misconduct and may result in the following measures, depending on the severity of the infraction and the decision of the Editorial Board:

  • Immediate rejection of the manuscript;

  • Temporary suspension of the right to submit new manuscripts;

  • Issuance of a formal retraction;

  • Notification to the affiliated academic institutions involved.

3.5. Final Provisions

RDP reserves the right to update this policy periodically, in line with technological advancements and ongoing ethical and legal debates on the subject. Authors and reviewers are advised to consult this section regularly to ensure full compliance with current guidelines.