Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Journal of International Islamic Law, Human Right and Public Policy is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. The journal follows the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

A selection of key ethical points for editors, reviewers, authors, and the publisher is outlined below.

Duties of Editors

Fair Play and Editorial Independence

Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, methodological or analytical validity, and clarity) and relevance to the journal’s scope. This evaluation is conducted without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious beliefs, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other external agencies. The Editor-in-Chief holds full authority over the entire editorial content and the timing of its publication.

Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, institutions, or organizations connected to the papers.

Publication Decisions

The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo double-blind peer review by at least two experts in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the submitted manuscripts will be published. This decision is based on the validation of the work, its significance to researchers, policymakers, and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations

Editors (in conjunction with the publisher) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised regarding a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be investigated, even if it is discovered years after publication. The editors follow the COPE Flowcharts when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct. If the ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other relevant note will be promptly published.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, helps authors improve their manuscripts. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the academic endeavor.

Promptness

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the legal or policy research reported in a manuscript, or knows that its prompt review will be impossible, should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the Editor-in-Chief. This obligation also applies to invited reviewers who decline the invitation.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Observations and critiques should be formulated clearly with supporting academic arguments so that authors can use them to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is strictly inappropriate.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work, statutory laws, or international treaties that have not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation, or argument reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Reviewers must notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published or unpublished paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, institutions, or organizations connected to the manuscript must immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors.

Duties of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed (whether empirical data or doctrinal legal analysis) and an objective discussion of its significance. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate or build upon the arguments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw qualitative/quantitative data, interview transcripts, or specific legal documents used in their study for editorial review. Authors should be prepared to ensure the accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication, provided that the confidentiality of research participants or informants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that they have written and submitted entirely original works. If they have used the work, ideas, or words of others, this must be appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms—including "passing off" another's paper as one's own, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper without attribution, or claiming research results conducted by others—constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is strictly unacceptable.

Multiple, Duplicate, Redundant, or Concurrent Submission

Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical and unacceptable.

Authorship of the Manuscript

Authorship must be limited to those who meet the following criteria:

1. Made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study.

2. Drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content.

3. Have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication.

All individuals who made substantial contributions but do not meet the criteria for authorship (e.g., language editing, general support) should be listed in the "Acknowledgments" section.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript at the earliest stage possible (generally at the time of submission). All sources of financial support for the research must be clearly disclosed, including grant numbers or references.

Protection of Human Participants and Privacy Rights

If the research involves human participants—such as field interviews, surveys, or case studies involving vulnerable populations—the authors must ensure that the study was conducted in full compliance with relevant legal and institutional ethical guidelines. Informed consent must be obtained from all human participants, and their privacy and anonymity rights must be strictly observed. A statement confirming ethical clearance and informed consent must be included in the manuscript.

Peer Review Cooperation

Authors are obliged to participate fully in the peer-review process. They must respond promptly to editors’ requests for data, clarifications, or proof of ethics approval. In the case of a "revisions necessary" decision, authors must respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point-by-point, and resubmit the revised text within the given deadline.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

When authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate to either correct the paper (via an erratum) or retract it.

Duties of the Publisher

Handling of Unethical Publishing Behavior

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification, or, in the most severe cases, the total retraction of the affected work.

Access to Journal Content

The publisher is committed to the permanent availability, open-access distribution, and preservation of scholarly research, ensuring long-term accessibility through secure digital archiving.