Confidentiality: AAll submissions and review conversations are kept completely private. Reviewers are prohibited from sharing any information with anyone other than the review committee regarding submissions or the review procedure.

Conflict of Interest: When it comes to the submissions papers are assigned to evaluate, reviewers are required to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Relationships on a personal level, teamwork in the workplace, or outright rivalry with the writers can all lead to conflicts.

Fairness and Impartiality: Reviewers are required to assess contributions impartially and only on the basis of their originality, quality, significance, and connection to the conference themes. It is important to stay away from biases based on the author's identity, association, or reputation.

Expertise:Reviewers should possess the necessary knowledge and experience in the field of the submissions they are tasked with evaluating. Reviewers should notify the program chairs as soon as they feel unfit to examine a particular submission.

Timeliness: Reviewers must follow the schedule that has been established for the review procedure. For writers to enhance work quality and for conference organizers to make well-informed judgments, timely and helpful feedback is crucial.

Constructive Feedback: Reviews have to be in-depth, considerate, and constructive. Feedback need to centre on a contribution's strengths and faults, offering concrete recommendations for improvements wherever feasible.

Confidential Review Platform: Review submissions should be made using implemented safe online review platform, which is confidential. Reviewers and program chairmen can communicate more easily thanks to this platform, which also guarantees anonymity.

Review Criteria: Reviewers will receive assessment criteria that are unique to the conference tracks or categories of submissions. These standards will direct the review procedure and provide uniformity in assessments of the submissions.

Appeals' Procedure: Authors may file an appeal against any judgments rendered throughout the review procedure. The program chair will assess appeals in conjunction with pertinent reviewers, with an emphasis on maintaining impartiality and openness.

Reviewer Recognition: “CLC-J” team is very grateful for the work of our reviewers, who are essential to the success of our conference. Reviewers may be asked to join the program committee for next editions, and their efforts will be recognized in conference materials. Kindly confirm that you have read and comprehended the above review policy and that you agree to adhere by its principles and rules by accepting to evaluate entries for the conference.

“CLC-J” appreciate your dedication to both the success of the conference and legal awareness.

Plagiarism Policy:

All submissions must be original, with correct citation of all the sources. It is forbidden to plagiarize, including self-plagiarism. Every contribution is checked for plagiarism. If plagiarism is found, the submission is rejected, the author's institution is notified, and it will not allowed to submit the work again. The acceptance plagiarism is 10% from all sources and not more than 2% from a single source. The AI content should not be more than 5%. When submitting work, authors attest to its originality and take full responsibility for its content. Author can file an appeal with the program chair. The purpose of this communication is to raise awareness of academic integrity and correct citation