Section A: Publication and authorship 

1. All submitted papers will be subjected to peer-review process by at least two external reviewers whose experts in a particular field.
2. The manuscript undergoes a double-blind peer review process.
3. The manuscript is evaluated based upon its relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.
4. The editors will make a decision based on the referee’s reports with several possibilities including accept with or without revisions, or decline publication.
5. The authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit the manuscript. This revised manuscript does not guarantee acceptance.
6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
7. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
8. The research cannot be included in more than one publication. 

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not been published previously.
3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. 
4. Authors must participate in the peer review process. 
5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
6. All authors mentioned in the paper must have significant contribution to the research.
7. Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
8. Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
9. Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
10. Authors must report to the Editors if any errors discovered in their published paper. 

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information. 
2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism to the author.
3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments
4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
6. Reviewers should not review 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. 

Section D: Editors’ responsibilities

1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to accept or reject the article.
2. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when improving the publication.
3. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
4. Editors should publish errata sheets or make corrections when needed.
5. Editors should have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources.
6. Editors should make the decisions solely on the papers’ importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication’s scope.
7. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without sensible reason. 
8. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers. 
9. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
10. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
11. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
12. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.
13. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.