Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

JESI (Journal of Islamic Economic Indonesia), called JESI, is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. The Editorial Board is responsible for, among others, preventing publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable, and the ILREJ does not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors who submitted articles: affirm that manuscript contents are original. Furthermore, the authors’ submission also implies that the manuscript has not been published previously in any language, either wholly or partly, and is not currently submitted for publication elsewhere. Editors, authors, and reviewers, within the Indonesia Law Reform Journal (ILREJ), are to be fully committed to good publication practice and accept the responsibility for fulfilling the following duties and responsibilities, as set by the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. As part of the Core Practices, COPE has written guidelines on the http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.

For Authors

Section A: Publication and authorship 

1. All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular manuscript.
2. The review process is double-blind peer-review.
3. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability, and language.
4. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
5. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
7. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
8. No research can be included in more than one publication. 

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. 
4. The authors must participate in the peer-review process. 
5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
6. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
7. The authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
8. The authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
9. The authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
10. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors. 

Section C: Use of AI in academic writing

1. This policy applies solely to the writing process and not to the use of AI for data analysis or to deriving insights from data as part of research activities.
2. AI is permitted only to improve the readability and language quality of the manuscript. Human oversight is mandatory, as AI can produce outputs that appear credible, but may be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. The authors bear full responsibility for the contents of their work.
3. The authors disclose the use of AI in their manuscript. This disclosure will be included in the published work to promote transparency and trust among the authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and contributors.
4. AI must not be listed as an author or co-author because authorship responsibilities can only be attributed to humans.

Section D: Use of AI in Images, Illustrations, and Artwork

1. The use of AI to create or modify images in submitted manuscripts is prohibited for purposes such as enhancement, obfuscation, or addition of elements. Minor adjustments such as brightness or contrast modifications are permitted as long as they do not alter the original information.
2. Exceptions are allowed if AI usage is part of the research methodology, such as biomedical imaging. In such cases, the use must be thoroughly detailed in the Methods section, including the name, version, and manufacturer of the technology.

For Reviewers

Section A: Reviewers’ responsibilities

1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information. 
2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
6. Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. 

Section B: Confidentiality of manuscripts

1. The manuscripts received for review are confidential documents. Reviewers are prohibited from uploading manuscripts or parts thereof to AI tools as this may violate the confidentiality rights of the authors.
2. Review reports are confidential and must not be uploaded to AI tools, even for language or readability enhancement purposes.

Section C: Prohibition of AI Use in the Review Process

1. AI must not be used to assist in the review process. Scientific evaluation requires critical thinking and original assessments that are beyond the capabilities of AI.
2. The reviewers bear full responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of their reports.

For Editors

Section A: Editors’ responsibilities

1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.
3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.
4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
6. Editors should have a clear picture of research funding sources.
7. Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity, and relevance to publication’s scope.
8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason. 
9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers. 
10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.
12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions; they should have proof of misconduct.
14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members.

Section B: Confidentiality of Manuscripts and Communications.

1. The manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents. Editors are prohibited from uploading manuscripts or related communication such as decision letters to AI tools.
2. Editorial letters or notifications must not be uploaded to AI for language enhancement.

Section C: Prohibition of AI Use in Evaluation

1. AI must not be used in the evaluation process or editorial decision-making, as these processes require a critical judgment that only humans can perform.
2. The editors bear full responsibility for the editorial process, final decisions, and communication with authors.

AAUPress supports the adoption of technologies that strengthen the integrity and efficiency of the editorial process while adhering to the principles of confidentiality and protecting the rights of all parties involved.