Ius Comparatum: Journal of Law Studies (ICJLS) recognizes that generative artificial intelligence and other AI-assisted tools now play a role in academic writing, data analysis, and manuscript preparation. The editorial team accepts the responsible use of these tools. At the same time, the team holds authors, reviewers, and editors fully accountable for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of any content submitted to or processed through this journal.

This policy sets clear boundaries for how generative AI and AI-assisted technology may be used across the publication process. It draws on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), current international publishing practice, and Kepdirjen 374/DST/D.D1/HM.01.01/2026 on journal accreditation, adapted to the needs of a legal studies journal.

1. Scope of This Policy

This policy applies to every stage of the publication process at ICJLS. It covers manuscript drafting, language editing, literature review, data analysis, figure and table preparation, peer review, and editorial decision-making. It applies equally to authors, reviewers, and editors who use any generative AI tool, including large language models such as ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, or similar platforms, and any AI-assisted writing, translation, or citation tool.

2. Authorship and Accountability

Generative AI tools cannot be listed as an author or co-author of any submission to ICJLS. Authorship carries legal and scholarly responsibility that only a natural person can hold. AI tools cannot give consent for publication, cannot approve a final manuscript, and cannot be held accountable for the accuracy or integrity of a published work. These responsibilities belong to the human authors alone.

Authors remain fully responsible for every part of a manuscript, including any content that AI tools helped produce. If an author uses a generative AI tool at any stage of manuscript preparation, the author must verify the accuracy, originality, and legal soundness of the resulting content before submission. ICJLS holds authors accountable for errors, fabricated citations, or misrepresented legal sources that originate from AI-generated text.

3. Permitted Use of Generative AI

Authors may use generative AI tools for limited, clearly bounded tasks, provided they disclose this use as described in Section 5. Acceptable uses include the following:

• Improving grammar, sentence structure, or readability of a manuscript originally written by the author.
• Assisting with translation between languages, where the author verifies the legal and linguistic accuracy of the translated text.
• Generating an initial outline or structure for a section, which the author then substantially rewrites and verifies.
• Summarizing long documents or legal texts for the author's own reference during research, provided the author independently verifies the summary against the primary source.
• Assisting with code, statistical formulas, or data visualization, where the author checks the output for correctness.

4. Prohibited Use of Generative AI

ICJLS does not accept manuscripts, or parts of manuscripts, produced by having an AI tool generate substantive legal analysis, arguments, findings, or conclusions without independent human verification against primary legal sources. The following uses are not permitted:

• Using AI to generate case citations, statutory references, or legal doctrine without checking these against the actual primary source. Generative AI tools frequently produce citations that do not exist or that misstate a court's actual holding.
• Using AI to write the core legal argument, analysis, or discussion section of a manuscript in place of the author's own scholarly reasoning.
• Submitting AI-generated text without disclosure, or presenting AI-generated content as the author's own original analysis.
• Uploading a manuscript under review, or any confidential material related to peer review, into a public generative AI tool. This includes reviewers uploading manuscripts they are evaluating.
• Using AI-generated images, data, or figures that misrepresent actual research findings.

5. Disclosure Requirements for Authors

Authors must disclose any use of generative AI or AI-assisted technology in the manuscript itself. This disclosure must appear in the Acknowledgments section or in a dedicated statement placed immediately before the reference list, and must include the following details:

• The name and version of the AI tool used.
• The specific stage of manuscript preparation where the tool was used, such as language editing, translation, or summarization.
• A statement confirming that the author has reviewed and verified all AI-assisted content, and takes full responsibility for its accuracy.

A sample disclosure statement reads as follows: "During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [name of tool, version] for [specific purpose]. After using this tool, the author(s) reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of this publication."

Manuscripts that use generative AI without disclosure, once discovered, will be treated as a breach of this policy and may be rejected during review or retracted after publication, in line with the journal's Retraction, Withdrawal, and Correction Policy.

6. Use of Generative AI in Peer Review

The use of generative AI tools is prohibited at every stage of the manuscript review process at ICJLS. This follows Kepdirjen 374/DST/D.D1/HM.01.01/2026 on journal accreditation, which bars Mitra Bestari (peer reviewers) from using artificial intelligence in the manuscript appraisal process, without exception.

Reviewers evaluating a manuscript for ICJLS must not use any generative AI tool at any point during the review process, whether to read, summarize, translate, or draft any part of their assessment, and must not upload the manuscript, or any part of it, into a generative AI tool. A reviewer's evaluation and written review report must be the product of the reviewer's own independent reading and scholarly judgment, without AI assistance of any kind.

A reviewer found to have used a generative AI tool during the review process will be removed from that review assignment, and the manuscript will be reassigned to another reviewer. Repeated violations may result in removal from the journal's reviewer database.

7. Use of Generative AI in Editorial Decision-Making

Generative AI tools may assist editors with administrative tasks, such as checking formatting consistency or flagging potential plagiarism through established similarity-checking software. Editors must not rely on AI tools to make final decisions on manuscript acceptance, rejection, or retraction. These decisions require human judgment grounded in legal scholarship, ethical standards, and the specific context of each submission. The Editor-in-Chief retains full responsibility for every editorial decision, regardless of what tools the editorial team consults during the process.

8. Verification and Screening

ICJLS screens submitted manuscripts using plagiarism detection software as part of its standard review process. The editorial team pays particular attention to citation accuracy, since AI-generated text can introduce fabricated or inaccurate references to statutes, cases, or scholarly sources. Authors should expect that reviewers and editors will verify any citation that appears in a submitted manuscript against its original source.

9. Violations and Consequences

If the editorial team finds that a manuscript contains undisclosed AI-generated content, fabricated citations traced to AI misuse, or AI-generated text presented as original human analysis, the team will take action proportional to the violation. This may include a request for revision with full disclosure, rejection of the manuscript, or, for content already published, retraction under the journal's Retraction, Withdrawal, and Correction Policy.

10. Policy Review

ICJLS will review and update this policy as generative AI technology and international publishing standards continue to evolve. The version published on the journal's website represents the policy currently in effect.

Contact

Questions about this policy, or requests for clarification before submission, should be directed to:

Editor-in-Chief, Ius Comparatum: Journal of Law Studies
Faculty of Law, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta
Jl. RS. Fatmawati, Pondok Labu, Jakarta Selatan 12450
Email: icjls@upnvj.ac.id