Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

AKSEN Journal of Contemporary Islamic Law (AJCIL)

This statement sets out the ethical obligations of authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher (AKSEN) involved in AJCIL. It is structured around the ten Core Practices areas maintained by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) — Authorship and Contributorship; Journal Management; Peer Review Processes; Ethical Oversight; Intellectual Property; Data and Reproducibility; Allegations of Misconduct; Conflicts of Interest; Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections; and Complaints and Appeals — which are widely used as an organizing framework by scholarly journals.

[Verification note: the ten category headings above are confirmed from COPE-affiliated sources. However, the specific obligations listed under each heading below are drafted by AJCIL's editorial team in its own words, informed by general knowledge of standard scholarly-publishing ethics norms — they are not direct quotations or a verified point-by-point reproduction of COPE's current published text. Before formally stating that AJCIL "follows COPE Core Practices," the editorial board should review the current guidance directly at publicationethics.org/core-practices, since COPE updates its guidance periodically and reproducing it secondhand risks drift from the source.]

1. Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made a substantial intellectual contribution to the conception, research, analysis, or drafting of the manuscript, and who take public responsibility for its content.
All listed authors must approve the final manuscript prior to submission and any subsequent revision.
Any change to authorship (addition, removal, or reordering) after submission requires written agreement from all authors, including those being added or removed, and must be approved by the Editor-in-Chief.
Non-author contributors (e.g., research assistants, translators, funders) should be acknowledged in an Acknowledgments section rather than listed as authors.
Use of AI tools: Generative AI tools may not be listed as authors, as they cannot take responsibility for the integrity of the work or hold legal accountability. Authors who use AI tools in manuscript preparation (e.g., for language editing or literature searching) must disclose this use and remain fully responsible for the accuracy and originality of the content produced.

2. Journal Management

The journal maintains a clearly documented editorial structure (Editor-in-Chief, Section Editors, Editorial Board) with defined roles and responsibilities.
Editorial decisions are made independent of commercial interests and are based solely on the scholarly merit, originality, and fit of the manuscript with the journal's scope.
The journal publishes its editorial policies (author guidelines, peer review process, fee schedule, this ethics statement) openly on its website/submission portal.
The Editorial Board is responsible for periodically reviewing and updating these policies to reflect evolving best practice.

3. Peer Review Processes

All research articles undergo double-blind peer review as described in the journal's separate Peer Review Process document.
Reviewers are expected to provide objective, timely, and constructive evaluations, and to disclose any conflicts of interest.
Editors are responsible for ensuring peer review is fair, rigorous, and free from bias related to authors' nationality, institutional affiliation, religious or political views, gender, or other personal characteristics.

4. Ethical Oversight

Where a submission involves human participants (e.g., interviews, surveys, fieldwork underlying socio-legal research), authors must confirm that appropriate ethical approval was obtained from a relevant institutional or ethics review body, and must state this in the manuscript's Method section.
Authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained from research participants where applicable, and that participant confidentiality has been protected.
The journal expects authors to comply with relevant national and international research ethics standards applicable to their jurisdiction and discipline.
[Placeholder: if AJCIL anticipates publishing empirical/fieldwork-based socio-legal research, the editorial board should specify a minimum ethics-approval documentation requirement, e.g., an ethics approval number or waiver statement.]

5. Intellectual Property

Authors must ensure that their manuscript is original work and that all sources — including classical Islamic legal texts, statutes, case law, and secondary scholarship — are properly attributed using the required citation style (CMOS 17th, Notes-Bibliography).
Reproduction of substantial excerpts from copyrighted material (e.g., translated Qur'anic commentary, published translations, figures, or tables from other works) requires the author to have obtained appropriate permission, which should be noted in the manuscript.
Copyright and licensing terms governing published articles will be specified in the journal's copyright policy (see Author Guidelines, Section 12).

6. Data and Reproducibility

Where a manuscript relies on empirical data (e.g., surveys, case databases, statistical analysis of court decisions), authors should describe their data sources and methodology with sufficient clarity and transparency to allow evaluation and, where feasible, replication.
Authors should retain underlying research data/materials and make them available upon reasonable editorial request during review, consistent with applicable confidentiality, privacy, or legal constraints.
[Placeholder: specify whether AJCIL requires or encourages a formal data availability statement, and any repository requirements.]

7. Allegations of Misconduct

Publication misconduct includes, but is not limited to: plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, duplicate/redundant publication, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and authorship disputes (e.g., ghost or guest authorship).

All submissions are screened using plagiarism-detection software prior to review.
Allegations of misconduct — whether raised before or after publication — will be investigated by the Editor-in-Chief, who may consult the Editorial Board and, where appropriate, the author's institution.
The review or production process will be paused pending resolution of a credible allegation.
Outcomes of a substantiated misconduct finding may include: rejection of the manuscript, retraction of a published article (with a public retraction notice explaining the reason), correction, or expression of concern, depending on the severity and stage of the finding.
The journal aims to follow a fair, proportionate, and well-documented process in handling such cases, consistent with the general principles reflected in COPE's guidance and flowcharts for editors — which the editorial board should consult directly for specific scenarios (e.g., disputed authorship, suspected image manipulation, plagiarism by a reviewer) rather than relying solely on this summary statement.

8. Conflicts of Interest / Competing Interests

Authors must disclose any financial, professional, or personal relationships that could be perceived to influence the research or its interpretation (e.g., funding sources, consultancy relationships, affiliations with religious or governmental bodies with a stake in the legal question discussed).
Reviewers and editors must disclose and, where necessary, recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where a conflict of interest exists (see Peer Review Process, Section 7).
Disclosed conflicts of interest do not automatically disqualify a manuscript from consideration but must be transparently reported in the published article where relevant.

9. Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

The journal welcomes scholarly critique and discussion of published articles through [placeholder: specify mechanism — e.g., a "Comments" or "Response" article type, letters to the editor].
Errors identified after publication (whether by authors, readers, or editors) will be addressed through a formal correction (for minor errors not affecting the overall integrity of the work) or retraction (for errors or misconduct that fundamentally undermine the article's validity or integrity).
Corrections and retraction notices will be linked to the original article and clearly indicate what was changed and why, consistent with standard scholarly-publishing transparency norms.

10. Complaints and Appeals

Complaints regarding editorial decisions, peer review conduct, or suspected ethical breaches may be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief.
Complaints will be acknowledged within [placeholder: e.g., 14 days] and investigated in a manner proportionate to their seriousness.
Authors dissatisfied with an editorial decision may appeal following the process described in the journal's Peer Review Process document (Section 10).
Where a complaint cannot be resolved internally, the editorial board may consider referring the matter to an external advisor or, if AJCIL becomes a COPE member, to COPE's case-consultation service.

Roles and Responsibilities Summary

Party	Key Ethical Responsibilities
Authors	Originality, proper attribution, accurate authorship, disclosure of conflicts and funding, ethical research conduct
Reviewers	Objective and timely review, confidentiality, disclosure of conflicts, alerting editors to potential misconduct
Editors	Fair and unbiased decision-making, safeguarding peer review integrity, managing misconduct allegations, ensuring policy transparency
Publisher (AKSEN)	Supporting editorial independence, maintaining infrastructure for archiving/correction/retraction, supporting investigations as needed