Public Governance, Administration and Finances is an independent, peer-reviewed, international scientific journal (hereinafter: Journal) in English, which is published both in printed and in electronic version. It was issued as a journal of public administration, governance and finances, covering the field of constitutional law, public governance, administrative law, administrative science, public services (together with their organisation), public policy, public management, financial law, in particular, public finances, economic administration, and economic competition. In order to ensure an appropriate procedure for publication, the Founder of the Journal adopts the present Code of Conduct (hereinafter: Code).

1 § The purpose and scope of the Code

(1) The purpose of the Code is to settle the Journal’s ethical rules of publication, which are implementing the principles of international scientific life also.

(2) The scope of the Code is applicable to the authors, the reviewers, the editorial contributors, the Editor in Chief, the Editorial Office, the Editorial Board, and the Editorial Review Board.

(3) The all regulators of the Journal, in particular, the provisions of the Deed of Foundation, shall be applied together with the present Code. The regulators concerning the Journal can befound at

(4) Besides to the ethical regulations of the present Code, the provisions of the National University of Public Service’s Ethical Code also shall be applied ( 

(5) The Code of the Journalshall be accepted by and complied with all parties involved.

(6) By submitting a manuscript to the Editorial Office, authors acknowledge that they are bound by the regulations of this Code.

(7) On the part of the publisher, the commencement of the publishing process shall be deemed as the acceptance of the present Code.

2 § Obligations of the authors

(1) In order to enhance the scientific and professional reputation of the Journal, it publishes scientific and professional papers of appropriate quality only. Accordingly, the manuscript’s interpretations and conclusions ought to be based solely on scientific facts or objective and logical reasoning.

(2) The scientific background and literature, on which the paper’s argument is based, must be accurately presented and referred to. Featuring false or knowingly inaccurate claims is unethical and violate the Code.

(3) The author guarantees that the submitted paper is his own original intellectual work or, if the author has recursed to some previously published material, that they are properly cited and referred to in accordance with the Author’s Guide.

(4) The results of the self-same research shall not submitted simultaneously to different journals. Such activities are deemed unethical and violation of the Code. Hence, the Journal does not publish extracts, expanded versions, or summaries of prior publications.

(5) It is not considered a violation of the above mentioned rule if authors publish their research topic from different aspects in different journals.

(6) It is not considered a violation of the above mentioned rule either if authors submit a larger, substantive revision of their previously published results improved with subsequent research. In such a case the authors shall refer to the fact of their earlier publication and revision.

(7) In all cases, according to the rules of the Author’s Guide all cited works must be properly referred.

(8) Authors shall refer to all bibliographical sources they have substantively used for their arguments.

(9) All persons who substantially contributed to the research shall be featured as authors of the submitted manuscript.

(10) All those who contributed significantly to the work shall be featured as co-authors. All those who participated in certain important stages of the research process, on which the manuscript is based, shall be mentioned as contributors. Authors guarantee that all co-authors were listed and that no unauthorised persons were listed as co-authors, also that all co-authors accepted the final version of the manuscript and agreed to the publication by the Journal.

(11) All authors are obliged to disclose in their manuscript those substantive conflicts of interest that could influence its outcome or interpretation. In case authors received research-grant relating to the subject-matter of the submitted manuscript, references to all their sources shall be included.

(12) If authors discover any major error or inaccuracy in their published articles, they are obliged to report it without any delay either to the Editorial Office, or to the Publisher of the Journal, they are also obliged to cooperate in the withdrawal or correction of the works concerned.

3 § Obligations of the peer reviewers and the method of the review

(1) The Journal uses double blind peer review system.

(2) In order to meet the requirements of objective, independent professional review, the Editorial Office sends the received and accepted anonymised manuscripts to two reviewers; authors are granted to access only to the content of the reviews.

(3) The invited reviewers shall make an acceptance statement of the invitation within the deadline set by the Editorial Office.

(4) If the reviewers consider that due to some professional or other reasons, they are unable to prepare their opinion within the deadline, they are obliged to inform the Editorial Office without delay. In such a case, the Editorial Office invites a new reviewer as soon as possible.

(5) Manuscripts that are accepted and submitted for review shall be kept confidential and they can be published or discussed with others only with the explicit written permission of the Editorial Office and the Author.

(6) Reviewers shall evaluate the accepted manuscript objectively and  support their scholarly opinion with clearly stated arguments. No criticism of the author is allowed under the review.

(7) Reviewers shall overview the scientific literature with regard to the manuscript’s subject matter. Reviewers shall examine all scholarly statements, quotations, and whether they contain appropriate references, especially to those that contain such observation, reasonings, or arguments which are derived from work already published.

(8) Reviewers shall draw the Editorial Office’s attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the reviewed manuscript and other publications which are known to the reviewers.

(9) Reviewers support the Editorial Office in making its decisions with suggestions of the manuscript’s acceptance, revision or rejection. In case the reviewers suggest the manuscript’s revision, they support the author in increasing the scientific niveau of the paper with their comments.

(10) Reviewers are obliged to keep the reviewed manuscript’s individual, original and innovative findings confidential, furthermore any profit oriented or other unlicensed use is prohibited.

(11) In case of conflicting reviews, the Editorial Office shall invite a third reviewer to explain the differences between the concerned reviews.

4 § Obligations of the Editorial Office, acceptance and publication of the manuscripts

(1) The Editorial Office decides on the acceptance of received manuscripts. In the course of the acceptance procedure, the Editorial Office considers, in particular, whether the manuscript’s subject matter fits into the Journal's profile and meet the requirements of the regulators of the Journal. The decision on the manuscript’s acceptance will be revoked if the manuscript is not published with regard to the reviewers’ opinion.

(2) The decision on the rejection of the manuscript’s acceptance is made by the Editorial Office according to the procedure settled in paragraph 1.

(3) In the course of making decision on the manuscripts’ acceptance attention shall be paid to the applicable acts, in particular, the Act LXXVI of 1999 on Copyright.

(4) The Journal’s Editorial Office examines whether the manuscript complies with the Author’s Guide and subjects the accepted manuscripts to plagiarism-scanning software scrutiny (hereinafter: plagiarism test).

(5) After the editorial plagiarism test, the subsequent issue of the Journal is compiled taking into account the reviewers’ opinions.

 (6) After compiling the subsequent issue of the Journal, the Editorial Office takes the final decision on the manuscript and forwards it to the publisher.

(7) The Editorial Office shall imply the opinions of the reviewers and the results of the plagiarism test into the decision of the manuscript’s acceptance.

(8) In case of the editorial decision requires a complete revision of the manuscript, authors may resubmit their revised manuscripts. In this case, the provisions of this section shall be applied to the revised manuscripts.

(9) All persons involved in the course of the acceptance or publishing of the manuscripts shall act in a non-discriminatory way, in particular,  regardless of the authors’ race, gender, disability, sexual orientation, beliefs, ethnicity, nationality or political affiliation.

(10) The Editorial Board, the Editorial Office and the reviewers are obliged to treat all information confidential regarding the manuscript and to handle all information according to the Code’s provisions.

 (11) Unpublished version of the manuscript can not be used by the Editorial Office without the author’s written permission.

5 § The archiving policy of the Journal

 (1) The authors are free to download and to print, or without any modification to republish the electronic version of the published articles. The identification data of the Journal shall be indicated in the course of such republication.

(2) Readers are free to download and to print the electronic version of the articles published in the Journal from the website indicated in Article 1. Paragraph (3).

(3) All users shall apply the appropriate reference method of the disciplines in connection with using of whole or parts of the publications. .

(4) The articles published in the Journal are uploaded to the REAL-J, the Repository of the Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, the links directed to them are also shared on the Facebook page of the Journal.

(5) The Journal applies the "blue" archiving policy of Sherpa/Romeo: archivable postprint (final, revised manuscript) or publisher’s version/PDF.