Retraction and Correction Policy
AKSEN Journal of Contemporary Islamic Law (AJCIL)
AJCIL is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. This policy sets out the circumstances under which a published article may be corrected, subject to an expression of concern, or retracted, and the process by which such decisions are made. This policy is informed by publicly available guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) on retractions and expressions of concern.
[Verification note: COPE's retraction guidance has been revised over time (a 2009 original version, and an updated version 3 released in 2025, which added more specific criteria — e.g., addressing undisclosed AI use and "paper mill" activity — and introduced separate guidance on expressions of concern). The definitions and criteria below reflect that publicly available guidance as I found it. Before publishing, the editorial board should confirm the current text directly at publicationethics.org/guidance/guideline/retraction-guidelines, since this is a document COPE actively updates.]
1. Types of Post-Publication Notice
AJCIL distinguishes between three types of post-publication notice, consistent with standard scholarly-publishing terminology:
| Notice Type | When Used |
|---|---|
| Correction (Corrigendum) | A small, author-originated error that does not affect the overall validity, conclusions, or scientific/scholarly integrity of the article (e.g., an incorrect citation, a typographical error in a name, a minor factual slip not affecting the argument). |
| Erratum | A small error introduced by the journal during production (e.g., a typesetting mistake, an omitted acknowledgment, an editing error), rather than an error originating with the author. |
| Expression of Concern (EOC) | Issued when credible concerns about an article's reliability, integrity, or ethical conduct have been raised, but the investigation is ongoing, will take significant time, or conclusive evidence is not yet available. |
| Retraction | Issued when an article is so seriously flawed — whether due to honest error or misconduct — that its findings or conclusions can no longer be relied upon, and continuing to leave it unmarked in the literature risks misleading readers. |
2. Grounds for Correction/Erratum
A correction or erratum will generally be issued when:
- There is a small, identifiable error that does not undermine the article's overall conclusions or scholarly integrity;
- The error resulted from honest mistake or production error rather than misconduct;
- Readers and the scholarly record are better served by transparently noting and fixing the error than by retracting a substantially sound article.
Partial retraction is avoided. If only a limited part of an article is flawed (for example, a few sentences that were plagiarized, or a citation error in the discussion section), AJCIL will generally prefer a correction — clearly documenting the issue — over retracting an otherwise sound article, since partial retractions make it difficult for readers to know which parts of an article remain reliable.
3. Grounds for Retraction
Consistent with the categories generally recognized in COPE's published retraction guidance, AJCIL may retract a published article where there is clear evidence of one or more of the following:
- The findings are unreliable, whether due to misconduct (e.g., data fabrication, falsification, image manipulation, undisclosed use of AI to generate content presented as original) or honest error (e.g., a significant miscalculation or methodological flaw);
- The work constitutes plagiarism or has been published elsewhere without proper attribution, permission, or justification (redundant/duplicate publication);
- The research, or the reporting of it, is found to be unethical (e.g., undisclosed serious conflicts of interest, or — where applicable — research conducted without appropriate ethical approval);
- Authorship cannot be verified, or there are serious, unresolved concerns about accountability for the work (e.g., fictitious authorship or identity misrepresentation);
- The article is found to be the product of a compromised or fraudulent peer review process.
Retraction is a mechanism to correct the scholarly record — it is not intended as a punitive measure against authors.
4. Expression of Concern (Interim Notice)
An Expression of Concern may be published, rather than an immediate retraction or correction, when:
- Credible concerns have been raised about an article but the investigation is expected to take considerable time (e.g., several months);
- Conclusive evidence cannot yet be obtained — for example, because an author's institution has not completed or released the findings of its own investigation, or because accounts of what occurred conflict;
- The editor judges that readers should be alerted promptly to a substantial, credible concern even though it is not yet resolved whether a correction or retraction will follow.
An Expression of Concern will later be resolved by either: (a) replacement with a retraction notice, if the article is found to be unreliable; (b) replacement with a correction, if a more limited issue is confirmed; or (c) a statement that the concern has been resolved and no further action is needed, if the article is found to be reliable.
5. Who May Initiate a Correction or Retraction
- Authors may request a correction or retraction of their own article if they discover a significant error or identify grounds consistent with Sections 2–3.
- Readers or third parties may raise concerns about a published article's integrity, which the editorial team will assess.
- The Editor-in-Chief, on the recommendation of the editorial board, may initiate a correction, expression of concern, or retraction independent of author agreement. Consistent with standard editorial practice, the journal editor retains final decision-making authority over retraction, since responsibility for the journal's content rests with the editor — an article may be retracted even if some or all authors disagree with the decision, provided the process in Section 6 has been followed.
6. Investigation and Decision Process
- A concern is raised (by an author, reader, reviewer, or editor) and logged by the editorial office.
- The Editor-in-Chief conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the concern is credible and substantial enough to warrant further investigation.
- If warranted, a fuller investigation is conducted, which may include: requesting an explanation and supporting materials from the author(s); consulting relevant editorial board members; and, where appropriate, contacting the author's institution.
- If the investigation will take significant time, an Expression of Concern may be published in the interim (Section 4).
- Based on the investigation's findings, the Editor-in-Chief determines the appropriate outcome: no action, correction/erratum, continued/resolved expression of concern, or retraction.
- The decision and its rationale are documented in the journal's internal records.
Notices should be published as soon as the editorial team is confident that a correction, expression of concern, or retraction is warranted, in order to limit the impact of an unreliable or flawed publication on the scholarly record (e.g., its being cited or relied upon by other researchers).
7. Authorship Disputes
If a dispute arises over authorship after publication, and there is no reason to doubt the validity or reliability of the underlying work itself, AJCIL will generally not retract the article solely on the basis of an authorship dispute. Instead, the editor will inform the parties that the journal cannot adjudicate the underlying dispute, but will publish a correction to the author/contributor list if appropriate documentation or agreement is provided to justify the change.
8. Publication and Format of Notices
- All corrections, errata, expressions of concern, and retraction notices are published as a separate, citable, linked item, clearly connected to the original article (e.g., via a note on the original article's page and a reciprocal link from the notice back to the article).
- Retraction notices will state clearly: which article is being retracted, who is retracting it (author(s), editor, or both), and the reason(s) for retraction.
- The retracted article itself is not removed from the journal's online archive; instead, the published version is clearly and prominently marked (e.g., watermarked "RETRACTED") so that readers encountering it — including through external search or citation — are aware of its status.
9. Preventing Further Harm
Where feasible, AJCIL will take reasonable steps to limit the negative impact of the issue while a matter is under investigation or after a retraction/correction is issued — for example, updating the article's indexed metadata where the journal has control over this, and cooperating with indexing services to reflect the article's corrected status.
