Indonesian Health Justice Review (IHJR) is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal committed to maintaining high standards of academic quality, research integrity, editorial independence, transparency, and responsible scholarly communication.

The journal publishes scholarly works within the fields covered by its aims and scope and applies consistent editorial and peer-review standards to all submissions. These policies apply to regular issues, Special Issues, and other scholarly content published by the journal.

1. Types of Publication

Indonesian Health Justice Review considers the following types of scholarly manuscripts for publication:

1.1 Original Research Article

Original Research Articles present original findings based on empirical, doctrinal, conceptual, qualitative, quantitative, mixed-methods, or interdisciplinary research.

Manuscripts should clearly present the research problem, methodology or analytical approach, findings or arguments, discussion, and conclusions.

1.2 Review Article

Review Articles provide a critical and systematic synthesis of existing scholarship on a specific topic relevant to health, law, justice, policy, or related interdisciplinary fields.

Depending on the nature of the review, authors should clearly describe the search strategy, selection criteria, analytical framework, and methodology used.

1.3 Systematic Review

Systematic Reviews synthesize existing evidence using a clearly defined and reproducible methodology.

Where applicable, authors should follow recognized reporting standards appropriate to the type of review, such as PRISMA.

1.4 Conceptual or Theoretical Article

Conceptual or Theoretical Articles develop, examine, or critically discuss theories, concepts, frameworks, or emerging approaches relevant to health justice and related fields.

Such manuscripts should provide a clear scholarly contribution and demonstrate substantial engagement with relevant literature.

1.5 Legal and Policy Analysis

Legal and Policy Analysis articles examine legislation, regulations, court decisions, legal doctrines, public policies, institutional frameworks, or regulatory developments related to health and justice.

These articles should employ a clearly articulated legal, policy, comparative, socio-legal, or interdisciplinary analytical approach.

1.6 Case Analysis

Case Analysis articles may critically examine significant judicial decisions, health-policy cases, institutional practices, or other cases relevant to the journal's scope.

The analysis should go beyond a descriptive presentation and provide a substantive scholarly evaluation of the legal, ethical, social, policy, or health implications of the case.

1.7 Short Communication or Research Note

Short Communications or Research Notes present concise but significant research findings, emerging issues, methodological observations, policy developments, or preliminary scholarly contributions.

The article must contain sufficient scholarly substance to warrant publication.

1.8 Book Review

The journal may publish critical reviews of recently published scholarly books relevant to its aims and scope.

Book Reviews are normally subject to editorial assessment and may be reviewed at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief.

1.9 Editorial and Commentary

Editorials and scholarly Commentaries may address important developments, emerging issues, debates, or perspectives relevant to health justice.

These contributions may be commissioned or invited by the Editorial Board and may be subject to an appropriate editorial review process.

The journal will clearly identify content that does not undergo the journal's standard external peer-review process.

2. Peer Review of Different Publication Types

Research Articles, Review Articles, Systematic Reviews, Conceptual or Theoretical Articles, Legal and Policy Analysis, Case Analysis, and Short Communications are subject to the journal's established peer-review process.

Editorials, invited Commentaries, Book Reviews, and other non-research content may be subject to editorial assessment rather than full external peer review, depending on the nature of the submission.

The applicable review process will be determined by the Editor-in-Chief and transparently indicated where appropriate.

The journal does not guarantee acceptance, publication, or a specific publication timeframe for any submission. International transparency principles recommend that journals clearly state which content is peer reviewed and identify exceptions to the normal peer-review process. 

3. Originality and Exclusive Submission

Manuscripts submitted to Indonesian Health Justice Review must be original and must not be under consideration by another journal.

By submitting a manuscript, authors confirm that:

• the manuscript has not been published previously in substantially similar form;
• the manuscript is not simultaneously submitted to another journal;
• all sources have been appropriately cited;
• all authors have approved the submitted version; and
• any substantial overlap with previous publications has been disclosed.

Duplicate, redundant, or simultaneous submission may result in rejection and further action under the journal's Publication Ethics Policy.

4. Publication Frequency

Indonesian Health Justice Review is published four times a year:

• February
• May
• August
• November

The journal is committed to maintaining a regular and predictable publication schedule. The publication frequency is clearly stated to promote transparency and continuity in scholarly communication. International publishing standards recommend that journals clearly state their publishing frequency and maintain their announced schedule except in exceptional circumstances. 

5. Special Issue Policy

The journal may publish Special Issues focusing on specific themes, emerging research areas, interdisciplinary topics, or significant developments within the journal's aims and scope.

Special Issues must:

• remain within the journal's aims and scope;
• meet the same academic and ethical standards as regular issues;
• undergo the journal's established peer-review process;
• be clearly identified as a Special Issue;
• remain under the overall editorial responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief; and
• comply with all applicable authorship, plagiarism, conflict-of-interest, research-integrity, and publication-ethics policies.

Guest Editors may coordinate a Special Issue, but the Editor-in-Chief retains final editorial responsibility and decision-making authority.

Guest Editors or Editorial Board members who have a conflict of interest with a manuscript must not participate in the editorial decision concerning that manuscript.

Special Issues must receive the same editorial oversight and external peer review as regular papers. This is specifically reflected in current DOAJ guidance for journals publishing Special Issues.

The publication of a Special Issue must not compromise the journal's regular publication schedule.

6. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Automated Tools Policy

6.1 General Principle

Indonesian Health Justice Review recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (AI) and automated tools may be used as research and writing-support technologies. However, their use must be transparent, responsible, and consistent with academic integrity.

AI tools cannot be listed as authors or co-authors.

Human authors remain fully responsible for the content, accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of their manuscripts.

Current scholarly publishing guidance recommends that journals establish clear AI policies and that authors disclose substantive use of generative AI, while AI tools should not be credited as authors. 

6.2 Permitted Use by Authors

Authors may use AI-assisted tools for limited purposes such as:

• language improvement;
• grammar and spelling correction;
• translation assistance;
• formatting assistance;
• brainstorming or organization of ideas;
• assistance with coding or data-processing tasks; and
• other legitimate research-support activities.

Authors must independently verify the output of AI tools.

AI-generated content must not be accepted uncritically, particularly where it may contain inaccurate information, fabricated references, misleading statements, or inappropriate interpretation.

6.3 Disclosure of Generative AI Use

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI or other automated tools when such use substantively contributes to the preparation or development of the manuscript, beyond straightforward language correction, editing, or formatting.

The disclosure should identify:

• the name of the AI tool;
• the purpose for which it was used; and
• the manner or extent of its use.

A suitable disclosure may be placed in the Acknowledgments or another designated section of the manuscript.

For example:

AI-Assisted Tools Disclosure: During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of tool] for [describe purpose]. The authors reviewed and verified all AI-assisted output and take full responsibility for the final content of the manuscript.

6.4 AI and Authorship

AI systems, including large language models and chatbots, cannot be listed as authors, co-authors, or contributors who hold authorship responsibility.

Authorship requires human accountability for the work, including responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of the published article.

6.5 AI as a Source

Generative AI tools should not be treated as conventional scholarly sources or cited as substitutes for primary academic sources.

Authors should cite the original, verifiable scholarly sources on which substantive claims are based.

AI-generated references must be independently verified. Fabricated, inaccurate, or unverifiable citations generated by AI constitute a serious academic-integrity concern.

6.6 Confidentiality and Sensitive Information

Authors, reviewers, and editors must not enter confidential manuscripts, unpublished research data, personal information, or other sensitive material into AI systems where doing so could compromise confidentiality, privacy, intellectual property, or research integrity.

6.7 AI Use by Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must not use generative AI to generate or substantially produce peer-review reports or assessments.

Reviewers must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and should not upload manuscripts or confidential manuscript content into external generative AI systems.

AI-assisted tools may only be used for limited purposes where permitted by the journal and where confidentiality and integrity can be protected.

This restriction reflects current scholarly-publishing guidance concerning confidentiality, bias, inaccurate outputs, and the risk of exposing unpublished manuscript content.

6.8 AI Use by Editors

Editors must not use generative AI to generate editorial decisions or peer-review assessments.

Editors remain responsible for evaluating manuscripts, reviewer reports, ethical concerns, and editorial decisions using independent human judgment.

Where automated tools are used by the journal for purposes such as similarity screening, image analysis, or other integrity checks, their outputs must be subject to human oversight and verification. 

6.9 Undisclosed or Inappropriate AI Use

Failure to disclose substantive AI use, submission of fabricated AI-generated content, fabricated references, plagiarism resulting from AI use, or other inappropriate use of AI may constitute a breach of the journal's publication ethics policy.

The journal may request clarification from authors and may take appropriate editorial action, including rejection, correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction, depending on the circumstances.

7. Human Responsibility and Editorial Oversight

AI-assisted technologies do not replace human responsibility in scholarly publishing.

All manuscripts and editorial decisions remain subject to human assessment. Automated tools may assist editorial workflows but cannot independently determine whether a manuscript should be accepted, rejected, corrected, or retracted.

8. Transparency of Journal Practices

The journal will maintain transparent information regarding:

• publication frequency;
• types of publications accepted;
• peer-review procedures;
• Special Issue procedures;
• authorship and contributorship;
• plagiarism prevention;
• conflicts of interest;
• research ethics;
• AI-assisted tools;
• corrections and retractions; and
• other relevant publication-ethics matters.

These policies apply consistently to regular issues and Special Issues. The Principles of Transparency and Best Practice emphasize that policies should be publicly available and that Special Issues and other published content should remain subject to transparent editorial standards. 

9. Policy Review

Indonesian Health Justice Review may periodically review and update these policies to reflect developments in scholarly publishing, research integrity, technology, and applicable international standards.

Any substantive changes to the journal's policies will be communicated through the journal's official website.