Guidelines for Articles

The Journal of Eastern European Law is published on the 25th day of each month. To have an article considered for publication, authors are requested to submit the following materials to easternlaw.ua@gmail.com no later than the 25th day of the month preceding publication:

  1. An electronic version of the manuscript*;
  2. A scanned review in PDF format signed by a Doctor of Law or Candidate of Law who, within the last three years, has published at least one article in journals indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection and/or Scopus, or has authored a monograph or book chapter published by international publishers classified within categories A, B, or C according to the classification of the Research School for Socio-Economic and Natural Sciences of the Environment (SENSE). The review form can be downloaded from the journal’s website.

File naming example: Petrov_article, Petrov_review.

Articles are published in the author’s original version. The Editorial Board of the Journal of Eastern European Law assumes no responsibility for spelling, stylistic, or other errors made by the author.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo double-blind peer review and plagiarism screening.

The Editorial Board reserves the right to review, edit, shorten, or reject submitted manuscripts. Manuscripts that do not comply with the submission requirements may be rejected without review. The Editorial Board does not necessarily share the views expressed by the authors. Reproduction of published articles is permitted only with the permission of the Editorial Board.

The journal obtains and registers DOIs (Digital Object Identifiers) for published articles.

Publication in the journal is free of charge.

Scope and Structure of Articles

The journal accepts original scholarly, practical, and educational-methodological research results that have not been previously published and are prepared in Ukrainian, English, or Russian, provided they comply with the following structure:

  1. Statement of the problem and its connection to important scientific or practical issues (“Problem Statement”);
  2. Analysis of recent research and publications related to the topic (“Analysis of Recent Research and Publications”);
  3. Identification of unresolved aspects of the problem (“Previously Unresolved Issues”);
  4. Purpose of the article (“Purpose”);
  5. Presentation of the main research findings with full justification of the results (“Main Body”);
  6. Conclusions and prospects for further research (“Conclusions”).

These sections must be highlighted in bold type within the manuscript.

Manuscript Requirements

Each manuscript must contain:

  • UDC classification number;
  • author’s full name, academic degree, academic title, and position;
  • article title;
  • abstracts in Ukrainian and English;
  • the English-language abstract must contain at least 1,800 characters, while the Ukrainian and Russian abstracts must contain at least 30 words each. To verify the accuracy of the English translation, authors are requested to provide a Ukrainian-language abstract;
  • 5–7 keywords;
  • main text of the article;
  • list of references prepared in accordance with applicable national standards.

Formatting Requirements

The manuscript must be prepared in Microsoft Word.

  • Margins: 20 mm on all sides;
  • Font: Times New Roman, 14 pt;
  • Line spacing: 1.5.

Authors must also submit, in a separate file, a digital photograph (4 × 5.5 cm) in JPG format with a resolution of 600 × 600 dpi.

Citations and References

References must be cited directly within the text.

Square brackets should contain the reference number from the bibliography followed by a comma and the specific page number.

Example: [5, p. 127]

Manuscripts that do not comply with these requirements will not be accepted for publication.

Example of the article.

УДК [351.74:621.397.4] (477)

Петров Петро Павлович –

кандидат юридичних наук, доцент,

 доцент кафедри адміністративного права

Київського національного університету

 імені Тараса Шевченка

ВІДЕОЗАПИС ЯК ДЖЕРЕЛО ДОКАЗІВ: НОТАТКИ ДО НАУКОВОЇ ДИСКУСІЇ

У статті розглянуто положення процесуального законодавства щодо поводження з таким доказом, як відеозапис, зроблено висновок про неможливість віднесення відеозапису до речових доказів і документів, а також запропоновано надати відеозапису статусу окремого джерела доказів.

Ключові слова: доказ, джерела доказів, відеозапис, судове провадження, позасудове провадження, процесуальне законодавство.

В статье рассмотрены положения процессуального законодательства каса- тельно обращения с таким доказательством, как видеозапись, сделан вывод о невозможности отнесения видеозаписи к вещественным доказательствам и документам, а также предложено предоставить видеозаписи статус отдельного источника доказательства.

Ключевые слова: доказательство, источник доказательств, видеозапись, судебное производство, внесудебное производство, процессуальное законодательство.

Petrov P.P. Videotape as a Source of Evidence: Notes to a Scholarly Dispute

The article deals with provisions of procedural legislation on giving definition to evidence and a videotape as one of its types. A videotape can refer both to physical evidence and documents pursuant to the provisions of procedural codes. But the author disagrees with these provisions. He mentions that procedural code identifies the document as a material object which is specially created to keep information and can be used as a proof of facts or circumstances during criminal proceeding. But the legislator provided such definition of the document without analyzing a semantic meaning of this word. A document is interpreted in the definition dictionary as 1) an official paper that proves some legal fact, certificates something, serves as an evidence of something. It is everything what confirms something. Commercial paper. 2) a certificate which tests the person; 3) a written essay, commendation etc. which proves something important or historical; 4) a paper which is created to be filled in. In this regard the author draws a conclusion that a document is a paper and a videotape can not be addressed as a paper. Physical evidence is items of the physical world which contain information on circumstances important for the case. Some procedural codes say that physical evidence includes magnetic, electronic and other data storage devices which contain audiovisual information on circumstances having the meaning for the case. In such a way a videotape can be the type of physical evidence. But a videotape does not correspond to the definition of a physical videotape which is contained in procedural codes. Magnetic, electronic and other data storage devices are items containing information which can be helpful to establish important circumstances. This information can be obtained from the content of these items through special equipment. This process differs from the process of examining physical or written evidence when their material from is examined. In this regard the author makes a conclusion that the legislator referring a videotape to physical evidence or documents does not want to take into account transformations in the world including progress in science and technology. In turn it tries to explain new facts with old definitions. The author does not accept this position and proposes to provide a videotape with the status of an independent type of evidence. The author proves that this step will assist judges to have a more serious attitude to this type of evidence and take it into account during the trial. In this regard the author offers to amend procedural legislation in force with a provision that factual circumstances can be established by audio- and videotapes and allocate in separate section procedure for handling with this evidence. The author analyzes procedure of using videotape in a non-judicial process. She considers provisions of the Code of Ukraine on Administrative Offences and makes a conclusion that this law does not regulate handling with videotapes during procedures on administrative offences which are conducted by the representatives of public administration agencies. Thus propositions on amending procedural judicial legislation can be used in a non-judicial process. The author also proposes to amend the draft law on Administrative Procedural Code of Ukraine with provisions concerning videotape.

Keywords: evidence, source of evidence, videotape, judicial procedure, non-judicial procedure, procedural legislation.

Corrections and Retractions Policy

The Journal of Eastern European Law is committed to maintaining academic integrity and the reliability of the scholarly record. In accordance with the principles of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), the recommendations of Elsevier, and internationally recognized publishing standards, the journal clearly defines the responsibilities of authors, editors, and the publisher in cases involving errors, corrections, or ethical concerns identified after publication.

Post-Publication Corrections

If errors are identified in a published article that do not affect the reliability or validity of the research (for example, typographical errors, incorrect author affiliations, or minor factual inaccuracies), the Editorial Board will publish a correction notice.

Such a notice:

  • is clearly linked to the original article;
  • is freely accessible to readers;
  • describes the nature of the correction;
  • is issued with the agreement of the Editorial Board and the author(s);
  • is approved by the Editor-in-Chief.

Requests for corrections may be initiated by authors, editors, or readers. All requests are reviewed by the Editorial Board prior to publication.

Retractions

An article may be retracted in the following circumstances:

  • the findings are determined to be unreliable due to research misconduct (such as data fabrication, data falsification, or plagiarism) or an honest error (such as miscalculations or experimental mistakes);
  • the article constitutes a duplicate publication;
  • serious violations of research ethics are identified (for example, lack of informed consent or failure to comply with accepted standards for the ethical treatment of animals);
  • authors failed to disclose a conflict of interest that significantly affected the interpretation or evaluation of the research.

A retraction may be initiated by the Editorial Board or the publisher, even without the consent of the author(s).

A retraction notice:

  • clearly states the reason for the retraction;
  • is linked to the original article;
  • is publicly available;
  • identifies who initiated the retraction (the author(s), the editors, or both).

The original article remains accessible on the journal’s website but is clearly marked as “Retracted” and linked to the retraction notice.

Responsibilities of the Publisher and Editors

The Editorial Board and the publisher share responsibility for maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. In particular:

  • the Editorial Board impartially reviews all allegations of errors, ethical breaches, or research misconduct;
  • the publisher supports the Editorial Board in publishing corrections and retractions and ensures their accessibility and indexing;
  • decisions regarding corrections or retractions are made in accordance with COPE guidelines and independently of commercial interests.

In cases involving unresolved concerns or ongoing investigations, the Editorial Board may publish an Expression of Concern, which will be updated once the matter has been fully reviewed and resolved.

Archiving and Long-Term Open Access Preservation Policy

The Journal of Eastern European Law supports the principles of Open Science and Open Access, providing free and unrestricted access to all published materials without time limitations or registration requirements.

Open Access is intended to:

  • increase the visibility of scholarly research;
  • facilitate the global exchange of knowledge;
  • support the principles of transparent and accessible science.

The Editorial Board:

  • does not charge readers for access to content;
  • does not impose restrictions on the reuse of published materials;
  • supports the principles of open academic exchange;
  • promotes the indexing of journal content in international scientific databases and citation indexes.

The journal implements a policy of long-term preservation of scholarly publications and ensures sustainable access to all published materials.

Objectives of the Archiving Policy

The archiving policy is designed to ensure:

  • the long-term preservation of scholarly publications as part of the journal’s scientific archive;
  • the integrity, reliability, and permanence of published scholarly content;
  • continuous and equitable access to materials regardless of the date of publication or future technological developments.

Archiving Measures

To ensure long-term preservation, the journal applies a multi-layered archiving system, including:

  • regular backup of the complete collection of publications and metadata;
  • creation of duplicate archival copies in external scientific and library information systems;
  • use of standardized metadata formats to ensure interoperability with international scholarly resources;
  • maintenance of uninterrupted access to the journal archive as an essential component of journal operations.

Publishing Platform and Digital Preservation

The journal operates on an electronic publishing platform that provides:

  • systematic storage and administration of scholarly content;
  • structured creation and maintenance of metadata in accordance with international standards;
  • stable access to archived materials;
  • integration with scientific information systems and indexing databases;
  • monitoring of digital object integrity and protection against data loss.

Editorial Commitments

The Editorial Board guarantees:

  • permanent and uninterrupted access to the archive of all journal issues;
  • preservation of published materials in their original, unaltered form;
  • prompt restoration of access in the event of technical failures or service interruptions;
  • long-term maintenance of the electronic archive as an integral component of the journal’s scholarly infrastructure.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • RSS