Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
AKSEN Journal of Islam and Humanities (AJIH) Published by AKSEN (Akademika Semesta Nusantara)
AJIH is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all reasonable steps to prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred. This statement outlines the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher, and the procedures followed in cases of suspected misconduct.
This statement is informed by the principles and best-practice frameworks promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The editorial board is encouraged to formally register with and adopt COPE's current Core Practices and flowcharts as authoritative operational references, as COPE periodically updates its guidance; specific COPE documents should be consulted directly at the time of adoption rather than assumed from this statement.
1. Duties of Authors
Originality and Plagiarism Authors must ensure that submitted work is entirely original, and that any use of the work or words of others is appropriately cited or quoted (see the journal's Plagiarism Screening policy).
Data Integrity Authors presenting empirical research must ensure that data reported are accurate and that no data has been fabricated, falsified, or selectively presented to support a predetermined conclusion. Authors should be prepared to make underlying data available for editorial review upon reasonable request, where feasible and ethically appropriate.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Submission Authors must not submit the same manuscript, or manuscripts substantially describing the same research, to more than one journal concurrently. Prior publication (including in a substantially similar form, such as a thesis chapter, working paper, or conference proceeding) must be disclosed at submission.
Authorship Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant intellectual contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the work. All those who made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors; those who participated in less substantive aspects should be acknowledged rather than listed as authors. The corresponding author must ensure all co-authors have seen and approved the final manuscript and agree to its submission.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest Authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed as influencing the results or interpretation of the manuscript.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works Authors who discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work are obligated to promptly notify the editorial office and cooperate in issuing a correction, erratum, or retraction as appropriate.
Respect for Religious and Cultural Sources Given the journal's focus, authors engaging with Islamic primary texts (the Qur'an, hadith, classical scholarship) and with the lived practices of Muslim communities are expected to represent these sources and communities accurately and with appropriate scholarly and cultural sensitivity, avoiding misrepresentation or decontextualized use of sacred texts.
2. Duties of Editors
Fair and Impartial Evaluation Editors evaluate manuscripts solely on their intellectual and scholarly merit, without regard to the authors' race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.
Confidentiality Editors must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, and other editorial advisers, as appropriate.
Conflicts of Interest Editors must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest (e.g., collaboration, institutional affiliation, personal relationship with the author) and delegate handling to another qualified editor.
Decisions on Publication The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which submitted manuscripts are published, guided by the journal's editorial policies and constrained by legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
Oversight of Peer Review Editors are responsible for ensuring a fair, timely, and rigorous double-blind peer-review process (see the journal's Peer-Review Process document) and for making final decisions independent of reviewer recommendations where warranted.
Investigation of Misconduct Editors have a duty to take reasonable responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised about a submitted or published manuscript, in accordance with Section 5 below.
3. Duties of Reviewers
Confidentiality Reviewers must treat manuscripts under review as confidential documents and must not share or discuss them with others without editorial authorization.
Objectivity Reviews should be conducted objectively, with reviewers expressing their views clearly and supporting them with argument; personal criticism of the author is inappropriate.
Timeliness Reviewers who feel unqualified to review a manuscript, or who cannot complete the review within the agreed timeframe, should notify the editor promptly so that alternative arrangements can be made.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest Reviewers must not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the express written consent of the author, and must decline to review manuscripts where they have a conflict of interest (see the Peer-Review Process document, Section 6).
Alerting Editors to Concerns Reviewers should alert the handling editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published or submitted work of which they are aware.
4. Duties of the Publisher
AKSEN, as publisher, supports AJIH's editorial independence and undertakes to:
- Provide the infrastructure and resources necessary for ethical editorial operation, including access to plagiarism-screening tools
- Support the editorial board in investigating and resolving allegations of misconduct
- Ensure that business or commercial considerations never compromise editorial decision-making or intellectual integrity
- Facilitate long-term digital preservation and continued access to published content
5. Handling Allegations of Misconduct
When an allegation of misconduct is raised — whether concerning plagiarism, data fabrication or falsification, authorship disputes, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other ethical concerns — AJIH follows a structured process broadly consistent with COPE's recommended approach:
- Initial assessment by the Editor-in-Chief or a designated ethics committee to determine whether the allegation warrants investigation.
- Communication with the author(s), giving them a fair opportunity to respond to the specific allegation.
- Investigation, which may include consulting the author's institution, examining underlying data, or seeking independent expert opinion, as appropriate to the nature of the allegation.
- Resolution, which may result in:
- No action, if the allegation is not substantiated
- A request for correction or clarification
- Formal correction, erratum, or corrigendum
- Retraction of the article, accompanied by a public retraction notice explaining the reason
- Notification to the author's institution, in serious cases
- Documentation, with a clear internal record maintained of the allegation, process, and resolution.
Retraction notices are published, linked to the original article, and clearly marked as a retraction, in keeping with standard scholarly publishing practice.
6. Appeals and Complaints
Authors, reviewers, or readers who wish to raise a concern about the editorial process itself (as distinct from a scholarly disagreement with a decision) may submit a formal complaint to the Editor-in-Chief. Complaints will be acknowledged and addressed following the journal's internal procedures, with recourse to COPE's guidance where the matter is not resolved internally.
7. Human Subjects and Ethical Research Conduct
For empirical research involving human participants (e.g., interviews, surveys, ethnographic fieldwork), authors must confirm that:
- Appropriate ethical approval was obtained from a relevant institutional review board or ethics committee, where applicable to the author's institutional and national context
- Informed consent was obtained from participants
- Participant confidentiality and welfare were protected throughout the research
8. Periodic Review of This Statement
This Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement will be periodically reviewed by the editorial board to ensure continued alignment with evolving best practices in scholarly publishing, including updates to COPE's guidance. Material changes will be announced on the journal website.
Notes for the editorial board:
- This statement is modeled on widely used conventions in scholarly publishing ethics (broadly consistent with COPE's publicly known principles), but I have not quoted or reproduced any specific COPE document text — the board should consult COPE's current official Core Practices and flowcharts directly (cope.org) before formal adoption, and consider explicit COPE membership/registration if desired.
- Human-subjects ethical review requirements vary by country and institution — confirm current Indonesian national research ethics requirements (e.g., any national ethics committee framework) if the journal expects significant empirical submissions from Indonesian institutions.
- This document should be cross-referenced with the Peer-Review Process and Plagiarism Screening documents, which it complements.
