About the Journal

Focus and Scope

The A&C - Administrative & Constitutional Law Review is a quarterly scientific journal promoted by the Romeu Felipe Bacellar Institute of Law (Instituto de Direito Romeu Felipe Bacellar) with the support of the Institute of Administrative Law of Paraná - IPDA (Instituto Paranaense de Direito Administrativo). It was founded in 1999 and had its first 10 issues edited by Juruá Editora. From issue number 11 to the present day it is edited and published by Editora Fórum, both in print and in digital version, based at Digital Library Forum - BID (Biblioteca Digital Fórum). Its main objective is the dissemination of research on current issues in the areas of Administrative and Constitutional Law, aiming to reach the public of scholars, undergraduate and postgraduate researchers and Public Law professionals.

The editorial line of A&C - Administrative & Constitutional Law Review, established by its Editorial Board composed of renowned Brazilian and foreign scholars, is focused on research developed in the area of Constitutional and Administrative Law, focusing on the question of the effectiveness of its institutes not only in Brazil but also in comparative law, emphasizing the field of intersection between Public Administration and Constitution and the critical analysis of innovations in Public Law, notably in Latin America and European countries with latin culture.

The journal is classified in stratum A2 by the Commission Qualis - Law Area of CAPES (Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel - Brazilian Ministry of Education).

According to CNPq (the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development) classification, the journal covers the following areas:

Great area: Applied Social Sciences (6.00.00.00-7) / Area: Law (6.01.00.00-1) / Subarea: Theory of Law (6.01.01.00-8) / Specialty: Theory of the State (6.01.01.03-2).

Great area: Applied Social Sciences (6.00.00.00-7) / Area: Law (6.01.00.00-1) / Subarea: Public Law (6.01.02.00-4) / Specialty: Constitutional Law (6.01.02.05-5).

Great area: Applied Social Sciences (6.00.00.00-7) / Area: Law (6.01.00.00-1) / Subarea: Public Law (6.01.02.00-4) / Specialty: Administrative Law (6.01.02.06-3).

Peer Review Process

1. Articles are submitted to a double blind peer review process.

2. Articles are sent in anonimity to two ad hoc referees with doctoral degrees, all of them exogenous to the Institution that promotes the Journal (Instituto Bacellar) and to the State of Paraná (Brazil).

3. In case of controversy among the referees, the article is submitted to a third referee.

4. The referees are all Professors that hold a PhD, affiliated to national and foreign renowned universities.

5. The criteria used in the evaluation form are the following:

a) Is the referee able to evaluate the article once there is no conflict of interests?

b) Does the title reflect clearly and sufficiently the content of the article?

c) Does the article comply with the methodological standards of the journal?

d) Does the article present a scientific analysis on the subject?

e) Is there coherence and logic in the development of the theme?

f) Do the conclusions correspond to the research premises?

g) Are the bibliographic references sufficient, adequate and up to date?

h) Are the concepts used throughout the text generally correct?

i) Does the content comply with the criteria of non-disclosure of bias and/or defamation and slander that jeopardize the integrity of the readers and/or individuals cited?

j) Use this space to make general or specific comments that you consider pertinent.

6. The possible results of the evaluation process are:

a)  

b)  

c)  

7. The evaluation process usually takes from 12 to 18 months.

Publication Frequency

The Journal publishes four issues per year, released every three months, which together make up a volume. Each article is published as part of an issue with its own Table of Contents. The publication scheduling is one issue every 4 months:

  • Issue January/March: published on January
  • Issue April/June: published on April
  • Issue July/September: published on July
  • Issue October/December: published on October

Publishing Ethics and Publishing Malpractice Statement

This journal is committed to ethics and quality in publication, following international patterns of scientific publication. We support standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in publishing in our journal: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer and the publisher. We do not accept plagiarism or other unethical behavior. Thus, it follows the guidelines of the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010.

Duties of Editors:

  • Publication decision: The journal’s editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The editor is guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may consult with editorial board or reviewers in decision making.
  • Fair play: The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
  • Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of interest: The editor must not use unpublished information in his/her own research without the express written consent of the author. The editor should recuse him/herself from considering manuscripts in which he/she has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.
  • Involvement and cooperation in investigations: The editor should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Duties of Reviewers:

  • Contribution to Editorial Decision: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
  • Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
  • Confidentiality: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others.
  • Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively and referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  • Acknowledgement of Source: Peer reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. The peer reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors:

  • Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable..
  • Originality and Plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
  • Multiple or Redundant Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. To publish the same article in different journals without informing the editors and having their agreement constitute unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
  • Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
  • Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
  • Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
  • Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Duties of the Publisher

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Our articles are peer reviewed to ensure the quality of scientific publishing and we are also users of CrossCheck (CrossRef’s plagiarism software).

* This statement is based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Indexation

The A&C - Administrative & Constitutional Law Review is indexed in the following databases and information sources:

Web of Science:

Latindex: 

CrossRef: 

Google Scholar: 

Ulrich's Periodicals Directory: 

RVBI - Rede Virtual de Bibliotecas do Congresso Nacional: 

Library of Congress (USA):   

MIAR - Information Matrix for the Analysis of Journals: 

WorldCat: 

BASE - Bielefeld Academic Search Engine: 

Directory of Research Journals Indexing: 

REDIB - Red Iberoamericana de Innovación y Conocimiento Científico: 

CiteFactor: 

Erihplus:

EZB:

Diadorim:

Journal History

The A&C - Administrative & Constitutional Law Review was founded in 1999, published by the prestigious Juruá Editora, in Curitiba - Paraná, which was in charge of publishing the first 10 issues of the journal. From the issue number 11, the journal began to be edited by Editora Fórum, from Belo Horizonte - Minas Gerais.