Publication Ethics

Pranata Hukum is a scholarly journal published by the Master of Law Program, Universitas Bandar Lampung. The journal is committed to maintaining high standards of publication ethics and academic integrity throughout the editorial and publication process. This policy establishes the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, reviewers, and the publisher to ensure that manuscripts are evaluated and published fairly, transparently, and responsibly. The journal refers to the principles and best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) in addressing publication ethics and potential misconduct.

Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication

1. Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board are responsible for determining whether a manuscript should be accepted, revised, or rejected. Editorial decisions shall be based on the manuscript's originality, scholarly contribution, relevance to the scope of Pranata Hukum, methodological rigor, quality of legal analysis, clarity of presentation, and compliance with publication ethics. Decisions must not be influenced by the authors' race, gender, religion, nationality, institutional affiliation, or personal background.

2. Peer Review Integrity

Manuscripts shall be evaluated through the journal's established peer-review procedures. Reviewers are expected to assess the scholarly quality, originality, accuracy, and relevance of submissions objectively. Editorial decisions shall consider reviewers' recommendations while retaining the editorial team's responsibility for the final decision.

3. Confidentiality

Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and related editorial communications. Manuscripts and unpublished information must not be disclosed to unauthorized parties or used for personal, academic, or professional advantage without appropriate authorization.

4. Ethical Compliance

All parties involved in the publication process must comply with applicable ethical standards and legal requirements, including those concerning plagiarism, copyright, research integrity, conflicts of interest, and the responsible use of research data. Allegations of misconduct shall be assessed fairly and confidentially.

Duties of Authors

1. Reporting Standards

Authors must present their research accurately, objectively, and transparently. Manuscripts must provide sufficient information about the research methods, legal materials, data, analysis, and supporting references to allow readers to understand and assess the findings. Fabrication, falsification, misleading reporting, and deliberate omission of relevant information are unacceptable.

2. Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts are original and that all ideas, statements, data, legal arguments, and materials derived from other sources are properly acknowledged and cited. Plagiarism, self-plagiarism that improperly reuses previously published material, and other forms of unattributed appropriation constitute publication misconduct. Manuscripts may be screened using similarity-detection software and assessed by the editorial team before or during peer review.

3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal. A manuscript that substantially duplicates previously published work must not be presented as an entirely new contribution. Any legitimate reuse of previously published material must be transparently disclosed and properly cited.

4. Authorship and Contributions

Authorship must be limited to individuals who have made substantial scholarly contributions to the conception or design of the research, the collection or analysis of data or legal materials, the interpretation of findings, or the drafting and critical revision of the manuscript. All listed authors must approve the final version and accept accountability for their contributions. Honorary, gift, and ghost authorship are not permitted. Contributors who do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged appropriately.

5. Citation and Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must cite relevant legislation, court decisions, books, journal articles, research reports, and other sources accurately. Citations must support the arguments presented and must not be manipulated to inappropriately increase the citation counts of particular authors, journals, or publications.

6. Research Data and Supporting Materials

Authors must ensure that the data, documents, legal materials, and other evidence supporting their research are accurate and obtained or used appropriately. Authors may be asked to provide relevant supporting materials for editorial verification, subject to applicable confidentiality, privacy, legal restrictions, and research ethics requirements.

7. Disclosure of Funding and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose financial support, grants, sponsorship, and other funding sources related to the research. Any financial, professional, institutional, or personal relationship that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the research or its interpretation must also be disclosed.

8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in a submitted or published manuscript, they must promptly notify the editorial team and cooperate in the investigation and correction of the issue. Corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions may be considered when justified by the circumstances.

Duties of Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Reviewers assist editors in making informed editorial decisions and help authors improve the quality of their manuscripts. Reviews should evaluate originality, scholarly contribution, legal reasoning, methodological appropriateness, the use of sources, and the validity of conclusions.

2. Promptness

Reviewers who feel unqualified to assess a manuscript or are unable to complete a review within the agreed timeframe should promptly inform the editor and decline or withdraw from the review when necessary.

3. Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share manuscripts or discuss their contents with unauthorized persons, and must not use unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.

4. Objectivity and Constructive Feedback

Reviews must be objective, professional, and supported by clear scholarly reasoning. Personal criticism of authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should identify the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript and provide constructive recommendations that can help improve its quality.

5. Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited and inform the editor of substantial similarities between the manuscript under review and other publications of which they are aware. Concerns about unsupported claims, inaccurate legal references, or potential plagiarism should be communicated to the editor.

6. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any financial, professional, institutional, collaborative, or personal relationship that could affect their impartiality. They should decline a review when such a conflict cannot be appropriately managed.

Duties of Editors

1. Editorial Responsibility

Editors are responsible for maintaining the quality, fairness, and integrity of the publication process. They must assess manuscripts according to the journal's scope, editorial policies, scholarly merit, and ethical requirements. Editorial decisions must be independent of inappropriate commercial, personal, or external influence.

2. Fairness and Impartiality

Editors must evaluate manuscripts objectively and without discrimination based on authors' personal characteristics, nationality, institutional affiliation, or academic status. Manuscripts must be assessed on their scholarly quality and relevance.

3. Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must protect confidential information relating to submitted manuscripts, authors, reviewers, and editorial deliberations. Access to such information must be limited to individuals who require it for legitimate editorial purposes.

4. Reviewer Selection

Editors should select reviewers whose expertise is appropriate to the subject of the manuscript and take reasonable steps to avoid conflicts of interest. Reviewer recommendations must be considered carefully, while the final editorial decision remains the responsibility of the journal's authorized editor.

5. Handling Ethical Complaints

Editors must respond appropriately to allegations of plagiarism, fabricated or falsified data, duplicate publication, citation manipulation, authorship disputes, copyright violations, and other forms of research or publication misconduct. Concerns must be investigated fairly, confidentially, and in accordance with applicable procedures.

6. Corrections and Retractions

Editors should take appropriate action when significant errors or ethical violations are identified in published articles. Depending on the findings and severity of the issue, actions may include publishing a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction. Decisions should be documented and communicated transparently.