Publication Ethics

Publisher: Sinergi Legal Publisher

1. Purpose, Scope, and Governing Principles

1.1. Purpose and Application

Juris Sinergi Journal (hereinafter referred to as the “Journal”) is committed to maintaining the integrity, independence, transparency, and reliability of scholarly legal publication. This Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement (hereinafter referred to as the “Policy”) shall govern the conduct of authors, editors, reviewers, editorial personnel, and the Publisher in relation to manuscripts submitted to, reviewed by, accepted for, or published in the Journal.

1.2. Reference Standards and Transparency

The Journal shall administer its editorial activities in a manner consistent with the principles embodied in the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing issued jointly by COPE, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), the Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA), and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). Reference to those principles shall not be construed as a representation that the Journal holds membership, accreditation, or indexing status with any such organization.

1.3. Merit-Based Editorial Decisions

Editorial decisions shall be based exclusively on scholarly merit, legal relevance, methodological rigor, originality, and adherence to ethical standards. No decision shall be influenced by the author's institutional affiliation, nationality, ethnicity, religion, gender, political convictions, financial position, or any other irrelevant personal characteristic.

2. Editorial Independence and Duties of Editors

2.1. Editorial Authority and Independence

The Editor-in-Chief and duly appointed Handling Editors shall exercise independent academic judgment in assessing submitted manuscripts. Final authority over acceptance, revision, rejection, and necessary post-publication editorial measures shall rest with the competent Editor, subject to the Journal's published policies and applicable law.

2.2. Core Responsibilities of Editors

Editors shall:

1. assess manuscripts fairly, consistently, and on their scholarly merits;
2. preserve the confidentiality of submissions, review reports, author identities, and related communications, except insofar as disclosure is necessary for an authorized editorial process or required by law;
3. select appropriately qualified, independent reviewers and take reasonable steps to identify actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest;
4. prevent discriminatory practices, improper editorial influence, and manipulation of reviewer selection or recommendations;
5. give authors a reasonable opportunity to respond to material allegations concerning the integrity of their work;
6. avoid using unpublished material or privileged information obtained through editorial duties for personal or third-party benefit; and
7. take proportionate action where credible evidence of misconduct, material error, or compromised peer review arises.

2.3. Recusal and Independent Reassignment

An Editor who is an author, co-author, close collaborator, or otherwise materially interested in a submission shall recuse themselves from its assessment and decision-making. The manuscript shall be assigned to an independent Editor with appropriate authority.

3. Ethical Duties of Authors

3.1. Originality and Accurate Reporting

Authors shall ensure that each submitted manuscript is an original, accurate, and intellectually honest scholarly work. They shall report legal sources, research methods, evidence, findings, and conclusions faithfully and shall distinguish established law from interpretation, opinion, and proposed reform.

3.2. Prohibition of Fabrication and Misrepresentation

Authors shall not knowingly submit fabricated data, invented legislation, fictitious judgments, nonexistent case numbers, inaccurate quotations, materially misleading translations, or other purported authorities that cannot be verified. Where a legal source has been amended, repealed, overruled, or otherwise qualified, its temporal and jurisdictional status shall be represented accurately insofar as material to the research question.

3.3. Attribution, Disclosure, and Co-Author Approval

Authors shall acknowledge all sources, secure necessary permissions, disclose relevant funding and competing interests, and cooperate reasonably with requests for clarification or supporting documentation. The corresponding author shall ensure that all co-authors have approved the submitted version and subsequent material changes.

4. Authorship, Contributorship, and Changes to Authorship

4.1. Eligibility and Accountability for Authorship

Authorship shall be restricted to natural persons who have made a substantial intellectual contribution to the conception, design, investigation, legal analysis, interpretation, or preparation of the scholarly work; have participated in drafting or critically revising its substantive content; have approved the final version; and agree to be accountable for their contributions and to cooperate in resolving integrity concerns.

4.2. Prohibited Authorship Practices

Guest, gift, honorary, purchased, and ghost authorship are prohibited. Contributions that do not satisfy the criteria for authorship—including routine administrative assistance, general supervision, funding acquisition alone, or purely technical editing—should be acknowledged where appropriate and with the contributor's consent.

4.3. Changes to Authorship

Any proposal to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission shall be supported by a reasoned request and the written consent of all affected authors. The Editor may seek institutional verification where an authorship dispute cannot be resolved. No change shall be made merely for administrative convenience or to conceal a contributor's involvement.

4.4. Exclusion of AI Systems from Authorship

Artificial intelligence systems shall not be named as authors or co-authors.

5. Originality, Plagiarism, and Redundant Publication

5.1. Originality and Plagiarism

Manuscripts shall not contain plagiarism, unauthorized paraphrasing, unattributed copying, deceptive appropriation of another person's legal analysis, or substantial unattributed reuse of an author's own previously published material.

5.2. Simultaneous Submission and Prior Dissemination

Simultaneous submission of substantially the same manuscript to multiple journals is prohibited. Authors shall disclose prior dissemination—including preprints, conference papers, institutional repositories, dissertations, working papers, or earlier versions—when relevant to the Journal's assessment. Such disclosure does not, by itself, establish misconduct; the Editor shall determine whether the proposed submission contains sufficient original contribution and complies with the Journal's applicable prior-publication policy.

5.3. Derivative Publications and Similarity Screening

Translations, substantially overlapping articles, and derivative publications shall be accompanied by adequate disclosure, attribution, and any necessary permission. Screening software may inform editorial assessment, but no similarity percentage shall, by itself, conclusively establish plagiarism or warrant automatic rejection.

6. Accuracy and Integrity of Legal Research

6.1. Verification of Legal Authorities

The Journal expects particular care in the use of legal authorities. Authors shall verify the existence, accuracy, and relevance of statutes, regulations, treaties, judicial decisions, administrative instruments, legal commentaries, and other sources relied upon.

6.2. Accuracy of Judicial Citations

Citations to judicial decisions should identify the competent court, case number or other available identifier, date, and the proposition for which the decision is cited, where such information is applicable and accessible. Authors shall not misrepresent the holding of a judgment, its precedential weight, the procedural posture of a case, or the legal position applicable in a particular jurisdiction.

6.3. Methodological Transparency and Integrity of Evidence

Doctrinal, normative, comparative, empirical, socio-legal, and interdisciplinary manuscripts shall disclose their methodological approach sufficiently to permit informed scholarly scrutiny. Quotations, translations, statistical results, interview extracts, and documentary evidence shall be presented without material distortion.

7. Ethical Oversight of Empirical and Socio-Legal Research

7.1. Human Participants and Data Protection

Research involving human participants, interviews, surveys, observations, sensitive case records, or personal data shall comply with applicable legal requirements, institutional research-ethics rules, and appropriate standards of informed consent, confidentiality, and data protection.

7.2. Ethics Approval and Exemptions

Where ethics approval or an authorized exemption is required, authors shall disclose the relevant approval or exemption and provide supporting documentation upon reasonable editorial request. The Journal does not require ethics-board approval for purely doctrinal research that involves no human-participant research unless applicable law or institutional rules provide otherwise.

7.3. Protection of Vulnerable Persons and Sensitive Information

Authors shall protect the identity and legal interests of research participants, particularly minors, vulnerable persons, victims, witnesses, and persons involved in confidential proceedings. Anonymization, pseudonymization, and lawful restrictions on disclosure shall be observed where appropriate. The public availability of court documents shall not automatically justify unnecessary disclosure of sensitive personal information.

8. Research Data, Records, and Reproducibility

8.1. Retention of Research Records

Authors shall maintain records and underlying materials sufficient to substantiate their reported findings, subject to applicable retention obligations and legal or ethical restrictions.

8.2. Editorial Verification and Access Restrictions

Where appropriate, the Journal may request research instruments, anonymized datasets, coding frameworks, document lists, analytical protocols, or other supporting materials for confidential editorial verification. Authors shall explain limitations on access arising from privacy, professional secrecy, privileged communications, contractual duties, intellectual-property restrictions, or court-imposed confidentiality.

8.3. Data Availability and Lawful Sharing

Public data sharing shall not be required where disclosure would violate law, research-participant consent, confidentiality, or legitimate third-party rights. Where data cannot lawfully be shared, an appropriate data-availability statement may describe the restriction and, where feasible, the means by which verification can be undertaken.

9. Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure

9.1. Disclosure of Competing Interests

Authors, reviewers, editors, and editorial personnel shall disclose actual, potential, or reasonably perceived competing interests capable of affecting—or appearing to affect—their judgment. Such interests may be financial, professional, institutional, political, personal, or otherwise relevant to the subject matter.

9.2. Funding and Sponsor Involvement

Authors shall identify sources of research funding and describe any sponsor involvement in research design, data interpretation, manuscript preparation, or publication decisions. Where no relevant conflicts or funding exist, the Journal may require an express statement to that effect.

9.3. Management of Disclosed Conflicts

Disclosure shall not automatically disqualify a manuscript or reviewer; the Editor shall determine the appropriate management measure, including recusal, independent reassignment, additional review, or publication of a relevant disclosure.

10. Double-Blind Peer Review and Duties of Reviewers

10.1. Double-Blind Review Procedure

The Journal shall apply a double-blind peer-review procedure to scholarly research manuscripts that pass the preliminary editorial assessment. Such manuscripts shall ordinarily be evaluated by at least two independent experts in the relevant field of law.

10.2. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers shall:

1. accept assignments only where they possess the required expertise and can meet the applicable deadline;
2. assess manuscripts objectively, constructively, and without personal or discriminatory criticism;
3. maintain confidentiality and refrain from identifying, contacting, or investigating authors outside the authorized editorial process;
4. disclose competing interests promptly and decline or discontinue a review where independence is materially compromised;
5. identify relevant uncited scholarship without using citation requests to advance personal or institutional metrics; and
6. report suspected plagiarism, fabricated legal authorities, manipulated evidence, or other credible integrity concerns confidentially to the Editor.

10.3. Confidentiality and Editorial Decision-Making

Reviewers shall not use unpublished submissions for personal research or share them with other persons without prior editorial authorization. Reviewer recommendations shall be advisory; they shall not displace the Editor's final decision-making authority. Detailed procedures and deadlines are governed by the Journal's Reviewer Guidelines and Publication Process.

11. Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence

11.1. Applicability of the AI Use Policy

The use of generative artificial intelligence or other AI-assisted systems shall comply with the Journal's separately published Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Policy.

11.2. Disclosure and Author Accountability

AI tools shall not be credited as authors. Substantive AI assistance in the preparation, translation, analysis, programming, or generation of research content shall be disclosed as required by that Policy. Authors remain personally accountable for the originality, accuracy, verifiability, and legality of all content, including AI-assisted statements and legal citations.

11.3. Prohibited AI Practices and Confidentiality

AI-generated fictitious legislation, judgments, citations, interviews, evidence, or findings are prohibited. Reviewers and editors shall not upload confidential manuscripts or protected research data to external AI platforms where adequate confidentiality and data-security safeguards cannot be assured. AI shall not replace human editorial or peer-review judgment.

Related policy: https://journal.sinergilp.com/index.php/jsj/AIUsePolicy

12. Intellectual Property, Copyright, and Licensing

12.1. Third-Party Rights and Permissions

Authors shall respect copyright, database rights, rights of privacy, rights of publicity where applicable, and other intellectual-property interests. They shall obtain any legally required permission for third-party material, including substantial quotations, images, tables, figures, protected documents, and reproduced research instruments.

12.2. Copyright and Licensing Terms

Copyright ownership, publication permissions, applicable Creative Commons or other open-access licences, and rights of reuse shall be governed by the Journal's published copyright and licensing terms and the licence notice appearing on each article. The Journal shall make these terms accessible and shall identify the applicable rights and licences in article metadata and published files.

12.3. Independence from Publication Fees

No publication fee, payment, sponsorship, or commercial arrangement shall purchase editorial acceptance or influence the outcome of peer review. Any applicable author charges shall be published separately and transparently before submission.

13. Duties of the Publisher

13.1. Publisher Support for Editorial Integrity

PT. Sinergi Legal Publisher, as Publisher of the Journal, shall support the integrity and independence of editorial decision-making and shall provide reasonable administrative and technical measures for secure manuscript handling, preservation of editorial records, and publication of necessary notices.

13.2. Non-Interference and Independent Assessment

The Publisher shall not improperly interfere with scholarly assessments or direct the acceptance of manuscripts for commercial, political, or personal reasons. Where a complaint concerns an Editor-in-Chief or involves a material institutional conflict, the Publisher shall arrange for an appropriately independent assessment.

13.3. Cooperation with Investigations

The Publisher and Editors shall cooperate, as appropriate, with institutions and competent authorities in the investigation of credible research-integrity concerns, while respecting applicable law, confidentiality, and procedural fairness.

14. Identification and Investigation of Alleged Misconduct

14.1. Scope of Alleged Misconduct

The Journal may examine allegations including plagiarism; fabricated or falsified research; fictitious legal materials; forged identities or reviewer reports; undisclosed material conflicts of interest; unethical human-participant research; unauthorized disclosure; citation manipulation; paper-mill involvement; fraudulent authorship; compromised peer review; and other conduct materially undermining the scholarly record.

14.2. Submission of Allegations

Concerns should be submitted through the official Journal contact channel or OJS, identifying the manuscript or article, the alleged conduct, and any reasonably available supporting evidence. Anonymous reports may be assessed where sufficiently specific and credible.

14.3. Investigation Procedure

In addressing an allegation, the Editor or independent designee shall ordinarily undertake the following steps:

1. conduct an initial assessment;
2. preserve pertinent records;
3. notify the affected author or person of the substantive concern where appropriate and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond;
4. seek specialist, institutional, or independent advice where warranted;
5. evaluate the available evidence fairly; and
6. issue a proportionate decision and retain a confidential record of the process.

14.4. Procedural Fairness and Editorial Responsibility

The Journal shall avoid premature findings of guilt, retaliatory conduct, and unnecessary disclosure of allegations. An institution or competent authority may conduct a separate investigation; editorial responsibility for maintaining the published record remains with the Journal.

15. Editorial Measures and Sanctions

15.1. Available Editorial Measures

Depending on the seriousness of the matter and the evidentiary findings, the Journal may request clarification, correction, revised disclosure, supporting records, or additional peer review; reject a manuscript; suspend consideration pending inquiry; withdraw an editorial acceptance where justified prior to publication; publish a correction, expression of concern, or retraction; or notify an appropriate institution or authority where warranted and lawful.

15.2. Proportionality of Sanctions

Restrictions on future submissions or review invitations may be imposed only where reasonably justified, proportionate, documented, and communicated in accordance with applicable procedures. Editorial measures shall aim principally to protect the reliability of scholarly communication rather than to punish honest errors.

16. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

16.1. Corrections

A correction or corrigendum may be issued when an article contains a material but limited error that does not invalidate its principal findings or conclusions. The notice shall identify the original article and explain the correction with reasonable specificity.

16.2. Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued where substantial questions regarding an article's reliability remain unresolved and readers should be alerted pending further assessment. Such a notice shall not be treated as a finding of misconduct.

16.3. Retractions

An article may be retracted where its findings, evidentiary basis, or publication process are materially unreliable, including because of serious fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, unethical research, systematic citation manipulation, compromised peer review, or other grave defects. A retraction is intended to safeguard the scholarly record, not to operate as a disciplinary punishment.

16.4. Accessibility and Linking of Notices

Post-publication notices shall, wherever practicable, remain freely accessible, clearly identify the affected article, state the reasons for the action without unnecessary defamatory or personal assertions, and link bidirectionally to the article. Retracted articles shall ordinarily remain accessible with an unmistakable retraction marking; removal shall be exceptional and justified by compelling legal or safety considerations.

17. Post-Publication Discussion and Scholarly Criticism

17.1. Scholarly Discussion and Reporting of Concerns

The Journal welcomes evidence-based, civil, and legally responsible scholarly scrutiny of published articles. Readers may submit substantiated concerns, proposed corrections, or reasoned academic responses through the Journal's official contact mechanism.

17.2. Editorial Responses to Scholarly Criticism

Where appropriate, the Editor may invite a response from the original authors, arrange independent assessment, and publish an editorial notice or scholarly response. Disagreement over a legal interpretation or normative argument shall not, without more, constitute research misconduct or justify retraction.

18. Complaints and Appeals

18.1. Submission of Complaints

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other interested parties may submit a reasoned complaint concerning editorial conduct, conflicts of interest, peer-review irregularities, publication-integrity concerns, or the administration of these policies through the official Journal contact channel.

18.2. Grounds for Editorial Appeals

An author may appeal an editorial decision by identifying a material factual error, procedural irregularity, conflict of interest, or substantial misunderstanding of the manuscript. Mere disagreement with a reasoned scholarly assessment does not, by itself, establish grounds for reversal.

18.3. Independent Handling and Resolution

Complaints and appeals shall be reviewed by an Editor not materially involved in the contested decision, where practicable. If the Editor-in-Chief is implicated, the matter shall be referred to the Publisher for independent handling. The Journal shall acknowledge substantive complaints and communicate the outcome within a reasonable period, subject to the complexity of any investigation and confidentiality obligations. Reconsideration shall not guarantee acceptance.

Official contact: https://journal.sinergilp.com/index.php/jsj/about/contact

19. Confidentiality, Records, and Personal Data

19.1. Protection of Confidential Information

The Journal shall safeguard unpublished manuscripts, reviewer identities, correspondence, editorial deliberations, and personal information in accordance with applicable confidentiality and data-protection obligations. Access shall be limited to persons with a legitimate editorial, production, security, or legal need.

19.2. Retention of Editorial and Investigation Records

Reasonable records of review assignments, editorial decisions, author responses, complaints, investigations, and post-publication actions shall be retained to support accountability and the integrity of the scholarly record, subject to the Journal's records-management practices and applicable law.

20. Relationship to Other Editorial Policies

20.1. Coordination with Other Journal Policies

This Policy shall be read together with the Journal's Author Guidelines, Reviewer Guidelines, Publication Process, AI Use Policy, copyright and licensing terms, and privacy statement. In cases of apparent inconsistency, the Editor-in-Chief shall seek a harmonized interpretation that protects research integrity and is consistent with applicable law; any material policy conflict should be corrected publicly.

20.2. Publication Timetable and Research Integrity

The Journal's ordinary editorial and production timetable is addressed in the Publication Process, which establishes an overall target not exceeding six (6) calendar months for accepted manuscripts under the stipulated ordinary process. This publication timetable shall not compromise the depth of peer review or require the Journal to forgo a necessary ethics investigation, correction, or other integrity measure. Completion of peer review shall never guarantee acceptance or publication.

21. Policy Administration and Amendment

21.1. Administration and Periodic Amendment

The Editor-in-Chief and the Publisher shall oversee the implementation and periodic review of this Policy. Amendments shall be made publicly available through the Journal's official website and should not be applied in a manner that unfairly prejudices parties who relied on previously published procedures.

21.2. Relationship with Binding Legal Obligations

This Policy is intended to secure the integrity of scholarly publication in law and shall not be interpreted as limiting obligations imposed by applicable legislation, court orders, professional secrecy, or other legally binding requirements.

---

Juris Sinergi Journal (JSJ)
Sinergi Legal Publisher

References and Related Policies

1. COPE, Core Practices: https://publicationethics.org/core-practices
2. COPE / DOAJ / OASPA / WAME, Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing: https://doaj.org/apply/transparency/
3. COPE, Retraction Guidelines (2025): https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4
4. JSJ, Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use Policy: https://journal.sinergilp.com/index.php/jsj/AIUsePolicy
5. JSJ, Publication Ethics (current page): https://journal.sinergilp.com/index.php/jsj/PublicationEthics
6. JSJ, Contact: https://journal.sinergilp.com/index.php/jsj/about/contact