PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRATICE STATEMENT

1. Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal such as Ius Constituendum is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It directly reflects the quality of the authors' work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to establish standards of ethical behavior for all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, journal editors, peer reviewers, the publisher, and the academic community.

Magister Hukum Universitas Semarang, as the publisher of Ius Constituendum, takes its responsibilities throughout all stages of publication seriously and recognizes its ethical and other obligations. The journal is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprints, and other commercial revenue do not influence editorial decisions. The Editorial Board will also assist in communication with other journals and publishers whenever necessary and appropriate.

2. Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, and plagiarism in the production, conduct, or review of research, the preparation of an article, or the reporting of research results. When authors are found to have engaged in research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving published articles, the Editors have a responsibility to protect the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will follow the best practices and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) to resolve complaints fairly. The Editors will investigate the allegations. A submitted manuscript found to contain research misconduct will be rejected. If a published article is found to contain such misconduct, the journal may publish a retraction linked to the original article.

The initial assessment involves determining the validity of the allegation and whether it falls within the definition of research misconduct. This step also includes assessing whether the individuals making the allegation have relevant conflicts of interest.

If scientific misconduct or other substantial research irregularities are considered possible, the allegations will be shared with the corresponding author, who will be asked to provide a detailed response on behalf of all co-authors. After the response has been received and evaluated, further review may be conducted, including consultation with experts such as statistical reviewers.

Where misconduct is considered unlikely to have occurred, clarification, additional analysis, or both may be sufficient. These may be published as letters to the editor and, where appropriate, accompanied by a correction notice and corrections to the published article.

Institutions are expected to conduct appropriate and thorough investigations into allegations of scientific misconduct. Authors, journals, and institutions share an important responsibility to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. Based on the evaluation of such concerns, Ius Constituendum may take appropriate action, including issuing corrections, retractions with replacement, or retractions, to maintain the validity and integrity of the scholarly record.

3. Publication Decisions

The Editor of Ius Constituendum is responsible for deciding which submitted articles should be published. Such decisions must be based on the validation of the work and its importance to researchers and readers. The Editors may be guided by the journal's editorial policies and must comply with applicable legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editors may consult other editors or reviewers when making publication decisions.

4. Complaints and Appeals

Ius Constituendum maintains a procedure for handling complaints against the journal, its editorial staff, the Editorial Board, or the publisher. Complaints will be referred to an appropriate and impartial person for consideration, taking into account the nature of the case.

Complaints may concern any aspect of the journal's operations, including the editorial process, citation manipulation, unfair treatment by editors or reviewers, and peer-review manipulation. All complaints will be handled in accordance with relevant COPE guidance.

5. Fair Play

Editors shall evaluate manuscripts based on their intellectual content without discrimination based on the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

6. Confidentiality

The Editor and editorial staff must not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate to the editorial process.

7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

8. Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

Ius Constituendum accepts discussions and corrections concerning published articles. Readers who wish to submit a discussion or correction should contact the Editor-in-Chief by email and clearly explain the issue raised.

If accepted by the Editor-in-Chief, the discussion or correction may be published in a subsequent issue as a Letter to the Editor. The relevant author may respond to the discussion or correction by submitting a reply to the Editor-in-Chief. The Editors may then publish the response as a Reply to the Letter to the Editor.