1. Purpose

This policy establishes guidelines for the transparent and responsible use of artificial intelligence (AI) in manuscripts submitted to Foro: Law Review, as well as in peer review and editorial management processes. It aligns with the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

2. Scope

This policy applies to all authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial assistants involved in the editorial process.

3. Definitions

AI-assisted or AI-generated content: Any text, image, figure, code, data analysis, or any other element of the manuscript whose production involved an artificial intelligence tool, regardless of the degree of intervention or the level of subsequent editing carried out by the author.

AI-generated images

Images, figures, or visualizations generated wholly or partially through AI tools are subject to the following requirements, in accordance with the journal’s current policy on image source certification:

• Figure caption disclosure: Any AI-generated image must be identified as such in its caption, indicating the tool used and the date of generation.
• Author responsibility: The author assumes full responsibility for any potential third-party copyright infringements arising from the use of AI-generated images.
• Right of rejection: The journal reserves the right to reject AI-generated figures whose content cannot be verified or is inaccurate.

4. Authorship and prohibition of citing AI as a source

AI tools may not be listed as authors. Authorship requires the capacity to assume intellectual responsibility for the work, approve the final version of the manuscript, and respond for all aspects of the research. Only human beings can fulfill these requirements.

All listed authors must have made substantial contributions to the work and assume full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of any AI-assisted or AI-generated content. The formulation of the research problem, the interpretation of results, and the conclusions must be of human authorship.

Citing AI tools as bibliographic sources or as support for substantive claims is expressly prohibited. AI systems do not produce verifiable references, their responses are not reproducible, and they lack epistemic responsibility for their statements. The disclosure of use provided for in section five neither constitutes nor replaces an academic citation.

5. Maximum threshold and mandatory disclosure

Manuscripts submitted to Foro: Law Review may not exceed 20% AI-assisted or AI-generated content, according to the detection parameters of the Turnitin software used by the journal. Failure to comply with this threshold may constitute grounds for rejection of the manuscript, regardless of whether the corresponding disclosure has been made.

Any use of AI tools must be disclosed, without exception. This includes uses for stylistic correction, grammatical editing, translation, data analysis, figure generation, code writing, or any other intervention in the manuscript.

The only exceptions are the native spell-check functions of word processors and standard reference management software such as Zotero, EndNote, or Mendeley, which do not require disclosure because they do not intervene in the intellectual content of the manuscript.

6. Disclosure requirements

Any use of AI tools must be disclosed in the following sections:

• Cover letter: It must include a summary of all AI uses during the preparation of the manuscript.
• Introduction of the article: The use of AI must be reported as part of the methodological section, specifying: the name and version of the tool or tools used; the purpose and the sections of the manuscript in which they were employed; and the author’s role in reviewing and validating the AI-generated or AI-assisted content.

8. Peer review

Reviewers must not upload manuscripts or parts thereof to AI tools, as this violates the confidentiality of the editorial process. Nor should they use AI tools to generate peer review reports or to evaluate the scientific or argumentative quality of manuscripts.

9. Editorial use

9.1 Permitted uses

The editorial team may use generative artificial intelligence tools in activities deemed appropriate, provided that such use does not compromise ethics, integrity, transparency, or the proper management of the editorial process.

9.2 Consequences of non-compliance for authors

Disclosure of AI use does not in itself constitute grounds for manuscript rejection. However, failure to disclose such use, exceeding the 20% threshold, or the inappropriate use of AI may result in manuscript rejection, retraction of published articles, or other actions, in accordance with COPE guidelines.

9.3 Consequences of non-compliance for editors, editorial assistants, and reviewers

Depending on the severity of the case, consequences may include reassignment or cancellation of the editorial process of the affected article.

10. Policy updates

This policy will be reviewed annually or whenever circumstances require. Authors must consult the current version at the time of submission.

Effective date: May 2026