Na stronach internetowych Uczelni Łazarskiego stosowane są pliki "cookies" zgodnie z Polityką prywatności.

Skip to main content

Powrót poziom wyżejCzasopismo - Ius Novum - wersja angielska

IUS NOVUM (ISSN 1897-5577) is a quarterly of  the Faculty of Law and Administration of Lazarski University in Warsaw. It has been published since 2007. The main editorial aim is to present the opinions on the proposals of legislative changes, legal solutions passed, and their retrospective verification results. The scope of the presented considerations is not limited to one or two branches of law but is a forum to exchange thoughts concerning law sensu largo. The thematic range of Ius Novum is broad and covers the history of law, political and legal doctrines, Roman law, civil law, criminal law, administrative law, business law etc. The journal welcomes the opportunity to present the articles written by the faculty members of Lazarski University as well as scholars from other academic centres. We are happy to cooperate with renowned scholars and warmly greet those who are beginners in the field. The journal aspires to be a platform to exchange opinions for all who can present something interesting and new. Materials are published in the form of articles, commentaries, reviews and reports. In accordance with the 2015 evaluation of journals conducted by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, a publication in Ius Novum is awarded 11 points.

Advisory Board and Editors


Professor Maria Kruk-Jarosz, PhD, Lazarski University (Poland) – Chairperson 
Professor Sylvie Bernigasud, PhD, l’Université Lumière Lyon 2 (France) 
Professor Vincent Correia, PhD, Université Paris-Sud, Université de Poitiers (France) 
Professor Bertil Cottier, PhD, Università della Svizzera Italiana in Lugano (Switzerland) 
Professor Regina Garcimartín Montero, PhD, Universidad de Zaragoza (Spain) 
Professor Stephan Hobe, PhD, Cologne University (Germany) 
Professor, Dr h. c. Brunon Hołyst, PhD, University of Łódź (Poland) 
Professor Michele Indellicato, PhD, Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro (Italy) 
Professor Hugues Kenfack, PhD, Université Toulouse 1 in Toulouse (France) 
Professor Franciszek Longchamps de Bérier, PhD, Jagiellonian University (Poland)
Professor Pablo Mendes de Leon, PhD, Leiden University (the Netherlands) 
Professor Adam Olejniczak, PhD, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań (Poland)
Professor Ferdinando Parente, PhD Università degli Studi di Bari Aldo Moro (Italy)
Professor Grzegorz Rydlewski, PhD, University of Warsaw (Poland)
Professor Vinai Kumar Singh, PhD, New Delhi, Indian Society of International Law (India) 
Professor Gintaras Švedas, PhD, Vilniaus Universitetas (Lithuania) 
Professor Anita Ušacka, PhD, judge of the International Criminal Court in the Hague (the Netherlands) 
Professor Juana Maria Gil Ruiz, Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de Granada (Spain)
Professor Juan Carlos Ferré Olivé, Universidad de Huelva (Spain)
Professor Carmen Armendáriz León, Universidad Complutense de Madrid (Spain)
Ewa Weigend, PhD, the Max Planck Institute of Foreign and International Criminal Law in Freiburg (Germany)


Editor-in-Chief: Professor Ryszard A. Stefański, PhD – Lazarski University
Secretary: Professor Jacek Kosonoga, PhD – Lazarski University


Natallia Artsiomenka – Belarusian 
Grzegorz Butrym – English
Martin Dahl – German 
Maria Furman – Polish
Elwira Stefańska – Russian 
Jadwiga Ziębowicz – French


Criminal law and criminal procedure – Professor Barbara Nita-Światłowska, PhD 
Civil law – Helena Ciepła, PhD 
Administrative law – Professor Stanisław Hoc, PhD 
Constitutional law – Jacek Zaleśny, PhD 
International law – Professor Mariusz Muszyński, PhD 
Statistics – Krystyna Bąk, PhD


The quarterly publishes works on a wide variety of legal issues, reviews and reports on scholarly aspects of university life. The only condition is the reviewers’ positive opinion. The material for publication should be sent to the editor in the form of a standard typescript copy (30 lines of 60 characters each, i.e. about 1,800 characters on a page) together with a digital version saved on a data storage device or e-mailed to:

Footnotes should be placed at the bottom of a page with the use of digital numbering. Footnotes should be created according to Guidelines for authors, After the main part of the paper, it is necessary to include a bibliography containing only the sources referred to in the footnotes. Bibliography should be in alphabetical order.

Every article should be accompanied by an abstract containing a statement of the article’s aim, the method(s) used by the author, its results and conclusions. An abstract should not exceed 20 lines of typescript. If there are specialist terms or technical expressions in the abstract, their English equivalents should be provided. An article should not exceed 22 pages of standard typescript, and a review, a scholarly announcement or information – 12 pages.
The editor reserves the right to shorten an article, change the title or headings, and introduce stylistic changes.

The author should provide his/her full name (given name and surname), address, telephone/fax number, e-mail address, academic degree, scientific title, and the name of the research organization he/she is affiliated with.


IUS NOVUM Editorial Board strives to ensure high ethical standards. Articles submitted for publication in IUS NOVUM are assessed for their integrity, compliance with ethical standards and contribution to the development of scholarship. 
The principles listed below are based on the COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. 


Decision on publication
The Editor-in-Chief must obey laws on libel, copyright and plagiarism in their jurisdictions and is responsible for the decisions which of the submitted articles should be published. The Editor may consult with the Associate Editors and/or reviewers, in making publication decisions. If necessary, the Advisory Board’s opinion is also taken into consideration. The decision to publish an article may be constrained by the risk of potential libel, copyright or other intellectual property infringement, plagiarism or self-plagiarism and doubts concerning authorship or co-authorship, i.e. the so-called ghost and guest authorship. 

No member of the Editorial Board is entitled to reveal information on a submitted work to any other person than the one that is authorised to be informed in the course of the editorial procedure, its author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisors or the Publisher. The Editor does not provide authors with the information about reviewers and vice versa.

Conflict of interests and disclosing it
Unpublished articles or their fragments cannot be used in the Editorial Board staff’s or reviewers’ own research without an author’s explicit consent in writing. The Editor does not appoint reviewers who are authors’ subordinates or are in other direct personal relationships (if the Editor knows about them).

In order to prevent discrimination, the Editor complies with the principles of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland and the law in force in Poland.



Authorship The authorship should reflect individuals’ contribution to the work idea, project, implementation or interpretation. All co-authors who contributed to the publication should be listed. In case of persons who are not authors but made substantial contributions to the article, they should be listed in the acknowledgements section. The author should make sure that all the co-authors have been listed, they know and have accepted the final version of the article, and have given their consent for submitting the article for publication. Authors who publish the findings of their research should present the research methodology used, an objective discussion of the results and their importance for scholarship and practice. The work should provide reference to all the sources used. Publishing false or intentionally untrue statements is unethical.

Conflict of interests and disclosing it
Authors should disclose all sources of their projects funding, contribution of research institutions, societies and other entities as well as all other conflicts of interests that might affect the findings and the their interpretation.

Standards for reporting 
Authors of articles based on their own research should present detail of performed work and discuss its importance. Data the work is based on should be presented in detail. Statements that are not true or intentionally inaccurate shall be treated as unethical and prohibited conduct.

Access to data and their retention
Authors should provide unprocessed data regarding the work submitted for reviewing or should be prepared to ensure access to such data. Authors should retain the data for at least a year’s time from the publication.

Multiple, unnecessary or competing publications 
In general, authors should not publish materials describing the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same work to more than one editor concurrently is unethical and forbidden.
Confirming sources
Authors should acknowledge and reference all publications that affected the submitted work and must acknowledge making use of other authors’ work each time.

Substantial errors in the published work
In case authors find substantial errors or inaccuracy in their work, they are obliged to notify the Editorial Board Secretary without delay. In case the article has already been published, the author should cooperate with the Editor in order to retract the article or publish an adequate erratum.

Originality and plagiarism 
Authors submit only original works. They should make sure that the names of authors cited in the work and/or fragments of their works cited are properly acknowledged or referenced.

Ghost/guest authorship
Ghost authorship is when someone makes a substantial contribution to a work but he/she is not listed as an author or his/her role in the publication is not acknowledged. Guest authorship takes place when someone’s contribution is very small or inexistent but his/her name is listed as an author.

Ghost and guest authorship are manifestations of a lack of scientific integrity and all such cases shall be disclosed, including notification of adequate entities (institutions employing authors, scientific societies, associations of editors etc.). The Editorial Board shall document every instance of scientific dishonesty, especially the violation of the ethical principles binding in science.

In order to prevent ghost or guest authorship, authors provide declarations of authorship.



Editorial decisionsReviewers should support the Editor-in-Chief in decision-making and an author in correcting errors.

Reviewers who cannot review a work or know they will not be able to submit a review within an agreed time limit should inform the Editorial Board Secretary about that.

All reviewed works should be treated as confidential documents. They cannot be shown to or discussed with third parties who are not authorised members of the Editorial Board.

All reviews are made anonymously; neither does the Editor reveal information on authors to reviewers.

Objectiveness standards 
Reviews should be objective. Derogatory personal remarks are inappropriate. Reviewers should clearly express their opinions and provide adequate arguments. All doubts as well as critical and polemical comments should be included in the review.

Conflict of interests and disclosing it
Confidential information and ideas that come to mind as a result of a review must be kept secret and cannot be used to gain personal benefits. Reviewers should not review works of authors if there is a conflict of interests resulting from their close relationship.

Confirmation of sources
Reviewers should point out publications that an author has not referred to. Whatever statements are made about observations, sources or arguments that they had been previously discussed should be supported by an adequate citation. Reviewers should also inform the Editorial Board Secretary about any substantial similarities or partial overlaps noticed.