Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Indonesian Court and Justice Review (ICJR) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and academic integrity. As a peer-reviewed journal focusing on courts, judicial institutions, justice systems, legal institutions, and comparative judicial studies, ICJR recognizes that integrity in scholarly publishing is essential to the credibility of legal scholarship and the development of evidence-based knowledge.

This Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement establishes the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, reviewers, editorial board members, and the publisher involved in the publication process.

ICJR follows internationally recognized principles and best practices in scholarly publishing, particularly the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing developed by COPE, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). The journal also adopts relevant principles concerning authorship, conflicts of interest, peer review, research integrity, corrections, retractions, and the responsible use of artificial intelligence reflected in internationally recognized editorial standards.

The journal expects all parties involved in the publication process to act with honesty, transparency, independence, fairness, accountability, and respect for intellectual property.

1. Editorial Independence

ICJR maintains editorial independence in the selection, evaluation, and publication of manuscripts.

Editorial decisions shall be based on the academic quality, originality, methodological rigor, relevance, and contribution of a manuscript to the journal's field. Decisions shall not be influenced by commercial interests, political considerations, institutional pressure, personal relationships, the author's nationality, gender, religion, political position, institutional affiliation, seniority, or other irrelevant characteristics.

The journal's owner, publisher, sponsors, or other external parties shall not interfere with editorial decisions concerning individual manuscripts.

The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board retain responsibility for the journal's academic content and publication decisions.

2. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted manuscripts meet appropriate standards of originality, accuracy, academic integrity, and ethical conduct.

2.1 Originality

Authors must submit original scholarly work. A manuscript must not have been published previously in substantially similar form or be under consideration simultaneously by another journal.

Authors must properly acknowledge and cite all sources, including previous scholarship, legal authorities, judicial decisions, legislation, regulations, datasets, and other materials used in the manuscript.

2.2 Plagiarism

ICJR considers plagiarism to be a serious violation of academic integrity.

Plagiarism includes, but is not limited to:

  • presenting another person's words, ideas, arguments, data, or analysis as one's own;

  • substantial unattributed copying;

  • inappropriate paraphrasing;

  • failure to acknowledge the original source;

  • self-plagiarism or substantial reuse of one's own previously published material without appropriate disclosure; and

  • unauthorized reproduction of copyrighted material.

All manuscripts may be screened using appropriate similarity-detection tools. Similarity reports will be assessed contextually rather than solely on the basis of a predetermined percentage.

Where plagiarism or substantial inappropriate textual overlap is identified, the manuscript may be rejected and further action may be taken where appropriate.

2.3 Accuracy and Integrity of Research

Authors must present their research accurately and honestly.

Authors must not fabricate, falsify, manipulate, or selectively misrepresent evidence, data, sources, quotations, legal authorities, judicial decisions, research findings, or other materials.

In legal scholarship, authors are particularly responsible for ensuring the accuracy of:

  • citations to statutes and regulations;

  • judicial decisions;

  • constitutional provisions;

  • case numbers and court information;

  • quotations from judgments;

  • references to legal doctrines;

  • empirical evidence; and

  • translations of legal materials.

Any substantive error discovered after submission or publication should be promptly reported to the Editor.

2.4 Authorship and Contribution

Authorship must reflect substantive intellectual contributions to the manuscript.

ICJR adopts a contribution-based approach to authorship. Individuals listed as authors should have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work, research, analysis, interpretation, drafting, or critical revision, and should approve the final version and accept accountability for the integrity of the work.

The journal does not permit:

  • guest or honorary authorship;

  • gift authorship;

  • ghost authorship; or

  • inclusion of individuals who have not made an appropriate scholarly contribution.

Individuals who have contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship should be acknowledged where appropriate.

The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all listed authors have approved the manuscript, agreed to its submission, and provided accurate authorship information.

ICJR encourages authors to provide a contribution statement where appropriate. The principles underlying this policy are consistent with internationally recognized authorship standards.

2.5 Changes in Authorship

Any request to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission must be justified and approved by all affected authors.

The journal may require written confirmation from all authors before approving any change in authorship.

Authorship disputes that cannot be resolved among the authors may be referred to the relevant institution(s) for investigation. The journal will not ordinarily act as an arbitrator in institutional authorship disputes.

2.6 Duplicate, Redundant, and Overlapping Publication

Authors must not submit substantially the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously.

Authors must disclose any previous publication, working paper, conference paper, dissertation, book chapter, preprint, or other publicly available version that substantially overlaps with the submitted manuscript.

Where substantial overlap exists, authors must clearly explain the relationship between the works and appropriately cite the earlier publication.

The journal may reject a manuscript or take post-publication action where redundant or duplicate publication is established.

2.7 Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial relationship or activity that could influence, or reasonably be perceived to influence, the research or its interpretation.

For legal and judicial scholarship, relevant conflicts may include, among others:

  • professional involvement in litigation discussed in the manuscript;

  • representation of a party involved in a case under analysis;

  • consultancy for a government institution or private organization discussed in the research;

  • financial interests in an institution or policy examined in the manuscript;

  • personal or professional relationships with parties involved in a judicial dispute; and

  • other relationships that may reasonably create a perception of bias.

Disclosure does not necessarily mean that a manuscript is unsuitable for publication. Transparency enables editors and readers to appropriately assess potential sources of bias. This approach is consistent with internationally recognized principles concerning disclosure of financial and non-financial relationships.

2.8 Funding

Authors must disclose sources of financial support for the research or publication.

Where applicable, authors should explain the role of the funder in research design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, writing, and the decision to submit the manuscript.

Where there is no external funding, authors should provide an appropriate statement indicating that the research received no specific external financial support.

2.9 Research Involving Human Participants

Where legal research involves interviews, surveys, observation, personal data, confidential documents, or other research involving human participants, authors are responsible for complying with applicable ethical, legal, and institutional requirements.

Authors should obtain informed consent where appropriate and protect participants' privacy, confidentiality, and personal information.

Where institutional ethical approval is required, authors should provide relevant information concerning the approval.

The absence of formal ethical review requirements for a particular type of legal or socio-legal research does not relieve authors of their responsibility to protect participants and comply with applicable law.

3. Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are responsible for maintaining the academic integrity, fairness, and quality of the journal.

3.1 Fair Editorial Assessment

Editors shall evaluate manuscripts based on academic merit and relevance to the journal's scope.

Editors must not discriminate against authors on the basis of personal characteristics, nationality, institutional affiliation, political views, gender, religion, or other irrelevant considerations.

3.2 Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts.

Information about a manuscript shall only be disclosed to individuals directly involved in the editorial and peer review process or where disclosure is required for legitimate ethical or legal reasons.

Editors must not use unpublished information contained in submitted manuscripts for their own research or personal advantage.

3.3 Conflicts of Interest

Editors must disclose and appropriately manage actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest.

An editor who has a significant conflict concerning a manuscript must recuse themselves from the editorial decision-making process.

This includes situations involving close personal relationships, recent collaboration, institutional conflicts, financial interests, or direct involvement in the research or legal matter under discussion.

3.4 Manuscripts Submitted by Editors or Editorial Board Members

ICJR shall maintain appropriate safeguards when manuscripts are submitted by the Editor-in-Chief, editors, editorial board members, or individuals closely associated with the journal.

Such manuscripts must be handled independently by another qualified editor and subjected to the same peer review and editorial standards as other submissions.

Editorial position or institutional affiliation shall not provide an advantage in the publication process.

3.5 Editorial Decision-Making

Editors may reject a manuscript before or after peer review where there are legitimate concerns regarding:

  • academic quality;

  • lack of originality;

  • methodological weaknesses;

  • plagiarism;

  • research or publication misconduct;

  • ethical concerns;

  • conflicts of interest;

  • inaccurate or unreliable evidence; or

  • substantial deviation from the journal's scope.

Peer reviewer recommendations inform editorial decisions but do not automatically determine them. The final responsibility for publication decisions rests with the Editor.

3.6 Corrections and Retractions

Editors are responsible for taking appropriate action when credible concerns arise regarding the integrity of a published article.

Depending on the circumstances, the journal may publish:

  • a correction;

  • an erratum;

  • an expression of concern; or

  • a retraction.

Post-publication actions shall be handled transparently and documented as part of the scholarly record.

4. Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

ICJR employs a double-blind peer review process as described in its Peer Review Policy.

Reviewers are expected to:

  • provide objective, impartial, and constructive assessments;

  • maintain manuscript confidentiality;

  • evaluate manuscripts based on scholarly merit;

  • identify significant weaknesses in argumentation, methodology, evidence, and citation;

  • identify relevant published work that has not been appropriately acknowledged;

  • disclose conflicts of interest;

  • decline assignments outside their area of expertise; and

  • complete reviews within the agreed timeframe.

Reviewers must not use unpublished information, arguments, evidence, or ideas obtained through peer review for personal or professional advantage.

Reviewers must not contact authors directly about a manuscript under review unless explicitly authorized by the Editor.

Personal, discriminatory, hostile, or defamatory comments are inappropriate in reviewer reports.

These responsibilities reflect internationally recognized principles concerning confidentiality, objectivity, conflicts of interest, and reviewer conduct.

5. Conflicts of Interest in Peer Review

Reviewers must disclose any relationship or activity that may compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their impartiality.

A reviewer should decline an assignment where they:

  • have recently collaborated with one or more authors;

  • have a close personal or professional relationship with an author;

  • belong to the same institution where the manuscript originates, where this creates a significant conflict;

  • have a direct financial or professional interest in the research;

  • are directly involved in a legal dispute or institutional matter discussed in the manuscript; or

  • are in direct academic competition with the authors in a manner that could affect impartiality.

The journal may replace reviewers where a conflict is identified.

6. Artificial Intelligence and Generative AI

ICJR recognizes that artificial intelligence and generative AI tools can assist scholarly writing, language editing, research organization, and other activities. However, the use of AI must not compromise academic integrity, authorship accountability, confidentiality, or research reliability.

6.1 AI Use by Authors

Authors may use AI-assisted tools for limited purposes such as language improvement, grammar correction, translation assistance, formatting, or other legitimate editorial support.

However:

  • AI tools must not be listed as authors;

  • authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and content of the manuscript;

  • authors must verify all AI-generated content;

  • authors must not rely on AI-generated references, citations, quotations, legal authorities, or case information without independent verification;

  • AI must not be used to fabricate data, sources, legal authorities, quotations, case law, or research findings; and

  • where AI has made a substantive contribution to the development of the manuscript, authors should disclose its use in accordance with the journal's AI policy.

Authors remain accountable for the final published work regardless of whether AI tools were used.

6.2 AI Use by Reviewers

Reviewers must not upload confidential manuscripts, unpublished materials, reviewer reports, or other protected information to public or third-party generative AI systems where confidentiality cannot be assured.

Reviewers may only use AI tools in the peer review process where such use is expressly permitted by the journal and does not compromise confidentiality.

Reviewers remain responsible for the accuracy and integrity of their evaluations.

This approach is consistent with current international guidance emphasizing confidentiality and responsible AI use in peer review.

7. Research and Publication Misconduct

ICJR considers the following practices to constitute serious forms of research or publication misconduct:

  • plagiarism;

  • fabrication of evidence or data;

  • falsification or manipulation of evidence;

  • manipulation or misrepresentation of judicial decisions or legal sources;

  • duplicate or redundant publication;

  • simultaneous submission;

  • inappropriate authorship;

  • citation manipulation;

  • peer review manipulation;

  • undisclosed conflicts of interest;

  • unethical research involving human participants;

  • fraudulent statements concerning research or publication; and

  • deliberate misrepresentation of sources, findings, or research methods.

The list is not exhaustive. Other conduct that materially compromises the integrity of the scholarly record may also constitute misconduct.

8. Handling Allegations of Misconduct

When credible allegations of misconduct arise, the journal shall assess the matter in a fair, confidential, and proportionate manner.

The Editor may:

  1. request an explanation from the authors;

  2. request supporting documents or underlying evidence;

  3. consult reviewers or editorial board members;

  4. seek independent expert advice;

  5. contact the relevant institution or research organization;

  6. suspend the editorial process while an investigation is conducted; or

  7. take appropriate post-publication action where necessary.

Where an investigation requires institutional involvement, ICJR may refer the matter to the institution responsible for the research or the relevant author.

The journal will not make allegations of misconduct public before sufficient evidence is available, except where disclosure is necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record or for legal or ethical reasons.

9. Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

ICJR is committed to preserving the accuracy and integrity of the published scholarly record.

Correction

A correction may be issued where a published article contains an error that affects the accuracy or clarity of the publication but does not invalidate its principal argument or conclusions.

Retraction

A published article may be retracted where there is substantial evidence that:

  • the findings are unreliable;

  • significant fabrication or falsification has occurred;

  • substantial plagiarism is identified;

  • the article contains serious ethical violations;

  • the publication resulted from serious misconduct; or

  • another circumstance substantially undermines the integrity of the article.

A retraction notice shall clearly identify the retracted article and explain the reason for the retraction.

Expression of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued where there are credible concerns about the integrity of a published article but the available evidence is insufficient to reach a final conclusion.

Post-publication corrections and retractions will be handled transparently and remain connected to the original scholarly record.

10. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal an editorial decision where they believe that a significant factual, procedural, or ethical error affected the decision.

An appeal must provide a substantive explanation and should identify the specific issue requiring reconsideration.

ICJR will consider appeals fairly and independently. Where appropriate, the Editor may seek an additional assessment from an independent editor or reviewer.

Complaints concerning editorial conduct, peer review, publication ethics, or journal procedures should be directed to the Editor-in-Chief.

Complaints involving the Editor-in-Chief should be directed to an appropriate senior member of the Editorial Board or the journal's publisher.

The journal will seek to resolve complaints in a timely, transparent, and impartial manner.

11. Editorial and Peer Review Confidentiality

All manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, and unpublished research materials are treated as confidential.

Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not:

  • disclose manuscript contents without authorization;

  • share manuscripts with unauthorized individuals;

  • use unpublished information for personal advantage;

  • appropriate authors' ideas or arguments; or

  • disclose the identity of reviewers in a double-blind review process.

Confidentiality may be breached only where necessary to investigate suspected misconduct, comply with legal obligations, or protect the integrity of the scholarly record.

12. Special Issues and Guest Editors

Special Issues of ICJR are subject to the same publication ethics, editorial standards, peer review requirements, and research integrity principles as regular issues.

Guest editors must disclose any conflicts of interest and must not influence peer review or publication decisions for manuscripts in which they have a personal, professional, institutional, or financial interest.

Special Issue manuscripts must undergo independent editorial assessment and appropriate peer review.

The use of Special Issues must not compromise the journal's editorial independence or publication standards.

13. Transparency and Accountability

ICJR is committed to transparency in its editorial and publication practices.

The journal shall publicly provide clear information concerning:

  • its aims and scope;

  • editorial structure;

  • peer review process;

  • publication frequency;

  • authorship and contribution requirements;

  • conflicts of interest;

  • publication ethics;

  • plagiarism screening;

  • corrections and retractions;

  • copyright and licensing;

  • fees and applicable charges;

  • special issues; and

  • relevant policies concerning artificial intelligence and research integrity.

The journal does not guarantee acceptance of manuscripts based on payment, institutional status, author reputation, or personal relationships.

14. Post-Publication Scholarly Communication

ICJR welcomes responsible scholarly discussion concerning articles published in the journal.

Readers who identify substantial errors, questionable evidence, inaccurate citations, or possible ethical concerns are encouraged to notify the Editorial Board with sufficient supporting information.

The journal may investigate credible concerns and, where appropriate, publish corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or other notices to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.

15. Commitment to International Publication Standards

ICJR is committed to continuously improving its publication practices in accordance with internationally recognized standards of scholarly publishing.

The journal's publication ethics framework is informed by:

  • Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices;

  • COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing;

  • relevant internationally recognized principles concerning authorship, conflicts of interest, peer review, research integrity, corrections, and retractions;

  • ICMJE Recommendations, where applicable to the relevant aspects of scholarly publishing; and

  • applicable national laws, institutional research ethics requirements, and standards of academic integrity.

The journal periodically reviews its policies to ensure that its editorial and publication practices remain consistent with evolving international standards.

16. Final Statement

All authors, editors, reviewers, editorial board members, guest editors, and other individuals involved in the publication process of the Indonesian Court and Justice Review are expected to uphold the principles of honesty, independence, fairness, transparency, confidentiality, accountability, and respect for intellectual property.

Where ethical concerns arise, ICJR will prioritize the protection of the integrity of the scholarly record and will take proportionate and appropriate action in accordance with recognized publication-ethics principles.