Allegations of Research Misconduct

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Jurnal Analisis Hukum (JAH) takes all allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously. The journal follows the guidance and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in handling such cases, whether they arise before or after publication.

1. What Constitutes Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

  • Plagiarism, including self-plagiarism and text recycling without proper citation;
  • Fabrication or falsification of data, sources, legal materials, or interview results;
  • Duplicate or redundant publication and simultaneous submission to other journals;
  • Authorship misconduct, including guest, gift, or ghost authorship and unauthorized changes in authorship;
  • Undisclosed conflicts of interest;
  • Citation manipulation, including excessive self-citation or coercive citation;
  • Manipulation of the peer review process;
  • Undisclosed or inappropriate use of generative AI tools, contrary to the journal's GenAI Policy;
  • Ethical violations in research involving human participants, including the absence of informed consent where required.

2. How to Report an Allegation

Anyone (authors, reviewers, editors, readers, or institutions) may report suspected misconduct by contacting the Editor-in-Chief through the journal contact page or by email at [email jurnal]. The report should include:

  • The title, authors, and DOI or submission ID of the manuscript or article concerned;
  • A clear description of the alleged misconduct;
  • Supporting evidence, where available.

Anonymous reports will be considered if they are supported by sufficient and verifiable evidence. The identity of the person reporting will be kept confidential.

3. Investigation Procedure

  1. Acknowledgement: The editorial office acknowledges receipt of the allegation within [7] working days.
  2. Preliminary assessment: The Editor-in-Chief, together with at least one member of the Editorial Board who has no conflict of interest, assesses whether the allegation has a reasonable basis.
  3. Author response: If the allegation is supported by evidence, the corresponding author is contacted, informed of the concerns, and given [14] days to provide an explanation.
  4. Further investigation: If the explanation is unsatisfactory, the journal may contact the authors' institutions and request an institutional investigation.
  5. Decision: The editors reach a decision based on the available evidence and inform all parties involved.

4. Possible Outcomes

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the misconduct, the journal may:

  • Reject the manuscript if it is still under review;
  • Request the authors to correct the article (see the Correction and Retraction Policy);
  • Publish an Expression of Concern;
  • Retract the published article;
  • Inform the authors' institutions or funding bodies;
  • Prohibit the authors from submitting to JAH for a period determined by the Editorial Board.

5. Fairness and Confidentiality

All allegations are handled confidentially, fairly, and without prejudice. Authors are presumed to have acted in good faith until the investigation is concluded. Editors and reviewers with a conflict of interest are excluded from the process.