Publication Ethics

International Journal of Sustainable Law henceforth referred to as "IJLS," is a distinguished journal that undergoes peer review, published by the Universitas Kristen Cipta Wacana in Indonesia. It is accessible in both print and online formats and upholds a high standard of publication ethics, refraining from all forms of plagiarism. This declaration elucidates the ethical conduct of all parties involved in the publication process, including the author, editor-in-chief, editorial board, peer-reviewers, and publisher (Universitas Kristen Cipta Wacana). The aforementioned ethical practices align with the Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors put forth by COPE that has been written on http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.

Universitas Kristen Cipta Wacana as publisher of IJLS takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and we recognize our ethical behavior and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Universitas Kristen Cipta Wacana and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary. 

Section A: Publication and authorship

1. Each manuscript submitted undergoes a rigorous peer-review process by expert reviewers in the relevant field.
2. Our review process is a double-blind peer review, ensuring impartiality.
3. During the review, we consider factors such as relevance, originality, significance, soundness, language, and readability.
4. Manuscripts can be accepted, accepted with revisions, or rejected. However, if authors are advised to revise and resubmit, acceptance is not guaranteed.
5. Rejected articles will not be reconsidered.
6. Our acceptance of papers is subject to compliance with legal requirements, such as those governing libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
7. JMH adheres to the principle of not allowing research to be published in multiple publications.

Section B: Authors’ Duties

1. The authors must ensure accurate reporting standards of original research, presenting an objective discussion of its significance and including sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
2. The authors must provide raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, should be prepared to provide public access to such data if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
3. The authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4. The authors must not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
5. The authors must always give proper acknowledgement of sources, citing publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
6. The authors must ensure authorship is limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study, listing all appropriate co-authors and ensuring all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
7. The authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript and disclose all sources of financial support for the project.
8. The authors must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper when they discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work.

Section C: Reviewers’ Responsibilities

1. The reviewers must maintain confidentiality and treat all information regarding papers as privileged information.
2. Reviews should be conducted objectively and without the personal criticism of the author.
3. The reviewers must express their views clearly and support them with arguments.
4. Relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors must be identified by the reviewers.
5. The reviewers must bring to the Editor in Chief's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper that they have personal knowledge of.
6. Manuscripts that present conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers should not be reviewed by the reviewers.

Section D: Editors’ Responsibility

1. The editors hold complete responsibility and authority to either accept or reject an article, as well as being accountable for the overall quality and content of the publication.
2. When attempting to enhance the publication, editors must take into consideration both the needs of the authors and the readers.
3. Editors must uphold the integrity of the academic record and ensure that the papers' quality is maintained at all times.
4. If necessary, editors must publish errata pages or make any required corrections.
5. Editors must be fully aware of research funding sources to maintain transparency and avoid any potential conflicts of interest.
6. The decision to accept a paper must be based solely on its originality, importance, relevance to the publication's scope, and clarity.
7. Editors must not overturn previous decisions or reverse their own without valid justification.
8. The anonymity of reviewers must be preserved to maintain confidentiality.
9. All research material published must adhere to globally recognized ethical guidelines.
10. Editors should only accept a paper when they are reasonably confident of its authenticity.
11. Editors must take appropriate action if they suspect misconduct, regardless of whether the paper has been published or not, and must do their best to obtain a resolution to the problem.
12. Editors cannot reject papers based solely on suspicion but require evidence of misconduct before taking any action.
13. Conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers, and board members must be avoided at all times.