Article Publication Process
AKSEN Journal of Contemporary Islamic Law (AJCIL)
This document describes the end-to-end workflow a manuscript follows, from initial submission through to final publication. It consolidates and cross-references the journal's separate policy documents (Author Guidelines, Peer Review Process, Publication Fees, Publication Ethics Statement, Copyright Notice, Publication Frequency) into a single process overview for authors and editorial staff.
Overview: Stages at a Glance
| # | Stage | Primary Actor |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Manuscript Submission | Author |
| 2 | Initial Editorial Screening | Managing Editor |
| 3 | Editor Desk Review | Editor-in-Chief / Section Editor |
| 4 | Peer Review | Reviewers |
| 5 | Editorial Decision | Editor-in-Chief |
| 6 | Author Revision (if applicable) | Author |
| 7 | Re-review (if applicable) | Reviewers / Editor |
| 8 | Final Acceptance | Editor-in-Chief |
| 9 | Article Publication Charge (APC) | Author / Finance Office |
| 10 | Copyediting and Language Check | Copyeditor |
| 11 | Typesetting and Layout | Production/Layout Editor |
| 12 | Author Proof Review | Author |
| 13 | DOI Assignment and Metadata Registration | Managing Editor |
| 14 | Online Publication | Managing Editor |
| 15 | Issue Compilation (January / July) | Editorial Office |
| 16 | Post-Publication (indexing, archiving, promotion) | Editorial Office |
Stage 1: Manuscript Submission
The author submits the manuscript through the journal's submission portal, including:
- The anonymized manuscript file (per Author Guidelines, Section 9)
- A separate title page with author details, affiliations, and (where available) ORCID iD(s)
- A signed authorship/originality statement
- A cover letter (optional but encouraged)
No submission fee is charged (see Publication Fees, Section 2.1). Authors may optionally request Fast-Track Review at this stage (see Publication Fees, Section 2.2).
Stage 2: Initial Editorial Screening
The Managing Editor checks the submission for:
- Fit with the journal's Aims, Scope, and Focus
- Compliance with formatting and structural requirements (Author Guidelines, Sections 4–7)
- Completeness of required files (manuscript, title page, statements)
- Plagiarism/similarity screening (Author Guidelines, Section 8)
Manuscripts that are incomplete, out of scope, or fail similarity screening may be returned to the author or desk-rejected at this stage, without proceeding to peer review.
Stage 3: Editor Desk Review
The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned Section Editor conducts a substantive first read to assess originality, scholarly contribution, and suitability for peer review. A manuscript may be desk-rejected here if it clearly does not meet the journal's minimum standards, without being sent to external reviewers.
Stage 4: Peer Review
Manuscripts passing desk review proceed to double-blind peer review, following the procedures set out in the journal's Peer Review Process document (minimum two reviewers, evaluation criteria, timelines, conflict-of-interest handling).
Stage 5: Editorial Decision
Based on reviewer reports, the Editor-in-Chief issues one of the following decisions:
- Accept without revision
- Accept with minor revisions
- Major revisions required (subject to re-review)
- Reject
The decision letter is sent to the corresponding author, including relevant reviewer comments (with reviewer identities withheld unless a reviewer opted to sign their review).
Stage 6: Author Revision (if applicable)
If revisions are requested, the author submits:
- A revised manuscript
- A point-by-point response letter addressing each reviewer and editor comment
Authors are given a defined revision window. [Placeholder: specify the standard revision deadline, e.g., 4 weeks for minor revisions and 8 weeks for major revisions, and the policy for requesting an extension.]
Stage 7: Re-review (if applicable)
For manuscripts requiring major revisions, the revised version is typically returned to the original reviewers (or, if unavailable, new reviewers) to confirm that concerns have been adequately addressed, per the Peer Review Process document.
Stage 8: Final Acceptance
Once the Editor-in-Chief is satisfied that all substantive concerns have been resolved, the manuscript is formally accepted. An acceptance letter is issued to the corresponding author, stating the acceptance date (which will appear on the published article).
Stage 9: Article Publication Charge (APC)
Following acceptance, the author is invoiced for the Article Publication Charge (IDR 750,000), unless a fee waiver has been granted (see Publication Fees, Sections 2.3 and 4). Production does not proceed until payment is confirmed or a waiver is approved. [Placeholder: confirm payment processing timeline and whether production may begin in parallel with payment processing.]
Stage 10: Copyediting and Language Check
The accepted manuscript undergoes copyediting for:
- Grammar, clarity, and consistency (in English or Indonesian, as applicable)
- Consistent application of the required Chicago 17th (Notes-Bibliography) citation style
- Consistent transliteration of Arabic terms (Author Guidelines, Section 6)
Substantive content is not altered at this stage without author consultation; copyediting queries are sent back to the author for confirmation where needed.
Stage 11: Typesetting and Layout
The copyedited manuscript is formatted into the journal's standard layout template (headers, running titles, pagination, journal branding), producing a formatted proof (typically PDF).
Stage 12: Author Proof Review
The corresponding author is sent the typeset proof to review for:
- Typesetting errors
- Correct rendering of tables, footnotes, and special characters (including transliterated Arabic terms)
- Accuracy of author names, affiliations, and acknowledgments
Authors are asked to limit proof-stage changes to correction of errors; substantive changes to content are not permitted at this stage except in exceptional circumstances, subject to editorial approval. [Placeholder: specify proof turnaround time, e.g., 5 business days.]
Stage 13: DOI Assignment and Metadata Registration
Upon finalization of the proof, the article is assigned a persistent identifier (DOI) [placeholder: confirm registration agency, e.g., Crossref], and full bibliographic metadata (title, abstract, authors, ORCID iDs, keywords, references) is registered to support citation tracking and discoverability (see Indexing and Abstracting document).
Stage 14: Online Publication
[Placeholder: the editorial board should confirm whether AJCIL uses "online-first" publication — releasing each article individually as soon as production is complete — or holds all articles until the full issue is ready (see Publication Frequency, Section on Notes). Online-first is recommended to reduce publication lag and is common among biannual open access journals.]
Upon publication, the article is:
- Made freely available under the journal's Open Access Policy (immediate, no embargo)
- Licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 (see Copyright Notice)
- Permanently archived on the journal's platform (see Retraction and Correction Policy, Section 8, regarding non-removal of the published record)
Stage 15: Issue Compilation
Published articles are compiled into the relevant biannual issue (January or July), with a formal table of contents, issue-level metadata, and (if applicable) a downloadable full-issue PDF.
Stage 16: Post-Publication
- The article's metadata is submitted/updated with relevant indexing services as applicable (see Indexing and Abstracting document).
- The article remains subject to the journal's Retraction and Correction Policy should any post-publication concerns arise.
- Authors are encouraged to self-archive and share their published work per the Open Access Policy, Section 4.
Estimated Overall Timeline
[Placeholder: the editorial board should publish an estimated end-to-end timeline (e.g., "average time from submission to first decision: X weeks; average time from acceptance to online publication: Y weeks") once the journal has enough operating experience to state a credible estimate. Publishing an invented timeline before AJCIL has any track record would be misleading to authors — this figure should be based on the journal's actual early performance and updated periodically, or stated as a target rather than a guaranteed timeline.]
