The Editor-in-Chief has complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article. Editor should have no conflict of interest with respect to articles they reject/accept. When errors are found in a manuscript, the editor promotes publication of corrections or retractions.
The anonymity of reviewers is preserved.
Authors should actively participate in the peer review process and provide suitable responses to the comments raised by peer reviewers on time.
All authors must have significantly contributed to the research and fullfil the authorship criteria.
Authors must state that all data in the article are real and authentic.
All authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
Peer review/responsibility for the reviewers
Judgments should be objective.
Reviewers should have no conflict of interest with respect to the research, the authors and/or the research funders.
Reviewers should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited.
Reviewed articles should be treated confidentially.
Reviewers should advise editor, but the final decision on an article is made by the Editor-in-Chief.
Reviewers should provide constructive comments to improve the quality of the article.
Issues on Publishing Ethics
The journal follows the flowcharts and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in confronting any ethical misbehavior.
The CBJ precludes business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards.
The Editor-in-Chief is always willing to publish corrections and clarifications.
For more information about Publishing Ethics please refer to: