AI Use Policy
Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Policy
Juris Sinergi Journal (JSJ) recognizes the rapid development of Artificial Intelligence (AI), including Generative Artificial Intelligence, Large Language Models (LLMs), chatbots, and other AI-based tools that may assist in research and scholarly writing. The use of such technologies must be conducted responsibly, transparently, and ethically, and must not compromise academic integrity or human accountability for scholarly work.
This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, and all other parties involved in the publication process of Juris Sinergi Journal.
1. AI Cannot Be Listed as an Author
Artificial Intelligence tools, including but not limited to ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, and other AI-based systems, may not be listed as an author or co-author of any manuscript submitted to Juris Sinergi Journal.
Authorship may only be attributed to human contributors who meet the applicable authorship criteria and who are able to take responsibility for the originality, accuracy, integrity, and overall content of the scholarly work.
Human authors remain fully responsible for all parts of the manuscript, including any content generated, revised, or improved with the assistance of AI.
2. Use of AI by Authors
Authors may use AI-based tools as supporting instruments, provided that such use does not replace the authors' intellectual contribution, critical analysis, or academic responsibility.
AI may be used to assist with improving grammar and readability, supporting translation, refining language structure, developing preliminary ideas or outlines, supporting data processing or data analysis, generating code where the methodology is transparently described, and performing other technical tasks that do not diminish the authors' intellectual responsibility.
The use of AI must not replace the academic analysis, legal reasoning, critical interpretation, or scholarly judgment that should be performed by the authors themselves.
3. Disclosure of AI Use
Authors must disclose the use of Generative AI or other AI tools when such technologies are used substantively in manuscript preparation, analysis, substantive translation, the creation of tables or images, programming, data processing, or other research-related activities.
An AI-use disclosure statement should, at a minimum, identify the name of the AI tool used, explain the purpose for which it was used, indicate the section or part of the manuscript in which AI assistance was applied, and describe how the authors verified the accuracy and reliability of the AI-generated output.
Where relevant to the research methodology, authors are also encouraged to specify the AI model or version used and the approximate date or period of use so that the research process can be assessed transparently.
The use of conventional spelling or grammar-checking tools that do not generate substantive content does not need to be declared as Generative AI use.
4. Example of an AI Use Statement
Authors may use the following format:
Artificial Intelligence Use Statement
“In preparing this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI tool] to assist with [state the purpose of use, such as grammar checking, translation, language refinement, structural improvement, or specific analysis]. All outputs generated by the tool were reviewed, verified, and edited by the authors. The authors take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and final content of the manuscript.”
If AI was not used substantively, such a statement is not required unless specifically requested by the editor.
5. Accuracy of References and Legal Sources
Authors are required to verify all information generated or suggested by AI.
For manuscripts in the field of law, authors must directly verify the existence, accuracy, and relevance of legislation and regulations, court decisions, international treaties, books, scholarly articles, Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs), URLs, case numbers, numbers and years of legislation or regulations, and other legal authorities or academic references.
Authors must not use references, court decisions, legislation, quotations, DOIs, or other sources that are fabricated, fictitious, or falsely generated by AI.
AI must not be used as a substitute for primary legal sources or verifiable scholarly literature.
6. Responsibility for AI-Generated Content
All AI-generated or AI-assisted outputs must be critically reviewed by the authors before being incorporated into a manuscript.
Authors are responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted content is accurate, does not contain false, misleading, or deceptive information, does not involve fabrication or falsification, is free from plagiarism, does not infringe the copyright or intellectual property rights of others, relies on verifiable sources, and accurately represents arguments, analyses, and conclusions for which the authors can take full academic responsibility.
Stating that certain content was “generated by AI” does not exempt the authors from academic or ethical responsibility.
7. Prohibited Uses of AI
Juris Sinergi Journal does not permit the use of AI to generate false, manipulated, or fabricated research data; create non-existent references or quotations; falsify research findings; conceal or disguise plagiarism; replace the authors' entire analytical process or intellectual contribution; manipulate images or data in a misleading manner; create fabricated identities, respondent data, interviews, documents, court decisions, legislation, or other research evidence that does not actually exist; or engage in any other activity that violates the principles of academic integrity and publication ethics.
8. Use of AI in Images, Tables, and Data
If AI is used to generate or modify images, tables, visualizations, code, or analytical data that constitute a substantive part of the research, such use must be transparently disclosed in the manuscript.
Authors must ensure that such use does not alter research data in a misleading manner, infringe copyright or intellectual property rights, remove important or material information, create research data that were never actually obtained, or make the research findings impossible to verify.
Editors reserve the right to request additional data, documentation, or clarification to ensure the integrity of such materials.
9. Use of AI by Reviewers
Manuscripts submitted to reviewers are confidential documents.
Reviewers must not upload unpublished manuscripts, in whole or in part, to AI platforms if the confidentiality, security, or data-use practices of those platforms cannot be adequately assured.
Reviewers must not use AI as a substitute for their own scholarly, professional, and critical assessment of a manuscript.
If the use of AI in the peer-review process is specifically permitted by the editor, reviewers must disclose the type of AI tool used and the purpose of its use. Reviewers remain fully responsible for all comments, analyses, assessments, and recommendations submitted to the editor.
10. Use of AI by Editors
Editors must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts throughout the editorial and peer-review process.
Editors must not upload unpublished manuscripts to external AI services where data confidentiality cannot be guaranteed or where the necessary authorization has not been obtained.
Artificial Intelligence may be used as an administrative or technical support tool, but editorial decisions regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection of manuscripts remain the responsibility of human editors.
If the journal uses AI substantively in editorial or publication-production processes, such use must be conducted transparently and in a manner that preserves manuscript confidentiality, research integrity, and publication ethics.
11. Confidentiality and Data Protection
Authors, reviewers, and editors must consider the privacy policies, data-management practices, and data-security provisions of any AI service they use.
Confidential information, personal data, respondent data, unpublished documents, manuscripts under peer review, or other protected information must not be entered into third-party AI platforms where security and confidentiality cannot be adequately guaranteed.
12. Violations of This Policy
If undisclosed AI use, fabricated references, data manipulation, confidentiality breaches, plagiarism, or other forms of AI misuse are identified, the editors may request clarification and correction from the authors and may take appropriate editorial action in accordance with the seriousness of the violation and the Publication Ethics Policy of Juris Sinergi Journal.
For articles that have already been published, appropriate action may include corrections, editorial notices, expressions of concern, or retraction where serious violations of publication integrity are established.
13. Core Principles
Juris Sinergi Journal does not prohibit the responsible use of Artificial Intelligence in academic activities. However, AI must be used as a supporting tool, not as a substitute for human intellectual responsibility.
The core principles governing the use of AI in JSJ publications are Transparency, Accuracy, Accountability, Confidentiality, Originality, and Academic Integrity.
Authors, reviewers, and editors remain responsible for every decision and for the final outcome of any use of Artificial Intelligence throughout the publication process.
Juris Sinergi Journal (JSJ)
PT. Sinergi Legal Publisher
This policy may be updated from time to time in response to developments in Artificial Intelligence technologies and evolving standards of scholarly publishing and publication ethics.
