Publication Ethics
Jurnal Hukum Statuta (JHS) is a peer-reviewed journal published by the Faculty of Law, Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta. JHS is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and preventing all forms of academic misconduct throughout the publication process. This statement applies to all parties involved, including authors, editors, peer reviewers, and journal managers. All policies herein refer to the official guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly the COPE Core Practices and COPE Guidance and Tools.
Duties of Authors
1. Standards of Reporting. Authors must present an accurate account of the research conducted and an objective discussion of its significance. Authors must present their findings honestly, without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. Manuscripts must include sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts must be written in accordance with JHS writing guidelines.
2. Originality and Plagiarism. Authors must ensure the originality of their submitted work. Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously, unless authorized by the editorial board. All prior research and publications relevant to the work, whether by the authors themselves or others, must be properly cited. Direct quotations from other publications must be enclosed in quotation marks and accompanied by appropriate citation.
3. Multiple and Redundant Publication. Authors must not submit the same manuscript to another journal simultaneously. Authors must not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal. Where two or more manuscripts derive from the same research, adequate explanation must be provided and the primary publication must be cited as a reference.
4. Acknowledgement of Sources. Authors must properly cite all data sources used in the research and all publications that informed the work. Works by others that are cited must be referenced in accordance with applicable citation standards.
5. Authorship of the Article. Authorship should accurately reflect each individual's actual contribution to the research and its publication. Authorship is limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All individuals who have contributed significantly must be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the submitted version of the manuscript.
6. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. All authors must clearly disclose in the manuscript any financial or substantive conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of the research. All sources of financial support for the research project must be disclosed in the manuscript.
7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works. If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a submitted or published manuscript, the author must promptly notify the journal editor and cooperate to retract or correct the manuscript.
Duties of Editors
1. Publication Decisions. Editors are responsible for deciding which manuscripts are suitable for publication. Such decisions must always be based on the validity of the manuscript and its contribution to researchers and readers. Editors act in accordance with the journal's editorial board policies and are bound by applicable legal requirements regarding defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult other editors or peer reviewers in making decisions.
2. Fair Review. Editors must ensure that each manuscript is assessed for originality at an early stage. Editors must manage and utilize the peer review process fairly and wisely. Editors must select peer reviewers with appropriate expertise and avoid those with conflicts of interest with respect to the manuscript under review.
3. Fair Play. Editors must evaluate each manuscript solely on its intellectual merit, without regard to the gender, race, religion, ethnicity, nationality, or political views of the authors. Editors must uphold the principles of editorial freedom and integrity at all times.
4. Confidentiality. Editors must maintain the confidentiality of all information related to submitted manuscripts. Editors must not disclose such information to anyone other than the corresponding author, peer reviewers, and publisher.
5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. Editors must not use unpublished material from a submitted manuscript for their own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors must not be involved in decisions regarding manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest.
Duties of Peer Reviewers
1. Confidentiality. All information related to submitted manuscripts must be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. Such information must not be shown to or discussed with others, except with the editor's permission.
2. Acknowledgement of Sources. Peer reviewers must ensure that authors have properly cited all data sources used in the research. Reviewers must identify relevant publications that have not been cited by the authors. Reviewers must promptly notify the editorial board if they discover any misconduct, ethical violation, or substantial similarity between the manuscript under review and any other published or submitted work.
3. Objectivity. Manuscript review must be conducted objectively. Peer reviewers must express their opinions clearly, supported by well-reasoned arguments. Reviews must be constructive and provide feedback that assists authors in improving their manuscripts. Peer reviewers must follow the journal's guidelines in providing responses, unless there is a compelling reason not to do so.
4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. Privileged information obtained through the peer review process must remain confidential and must not be used for personal gain. Peer reviewers must not agree to review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with the authors or institutions associated with the manuscript.
5. Promptness. Peer reviewers must complete their review within a reasonable timeframe. Reviewers should only agree to review a manuscript if they are confident they can complete it within the agreed deadline. If a reviewer is unable to meet the deadline, the reviewer must promptly notify the editor so that the manuscript may be reassigned to another reviewer.
