Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Opinia De Journal: Journal of Islamic Law and Legal Studies
Published by Sekolah Tinggi Agama Islam Nahdlatul Ulama (STAINU) Madiun

Opinia De Journal: Journal of Islamic Law and Legal Studies is firmly committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics, and to taking all possible measures against publication malpractice. This statement is based on the COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and applies to all parties involved in the journal’s publication process—editors, authors, reviewers, and the publisher.

1. Duties of the Editorial Board

1.1 Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the submitted manuscripts should be published. The decision is made based on the manuscript’s academic merit, originality, clarity, relevance to the journal’s scope, and its contribution to the field of Islamic law and legal studies. The editorial board adheres strictly to the journal’s policies and legal requirements concerning issues such as libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

1.2 Editorial Independence and Fair Play

Editors evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the authors’ race, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. Editorial decisions are not influenced by commercial interests or institutional affiliations.

1.3 Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff shall maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts and related communications, disclosing information only to the corresponding author, reviewers, and editorial advisors, as appropriate.

1.4 Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Editors must not use unpublished information disclosed in submitted manuscripts for their own research or personal advantage. They must recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, institutions, or companies connected to the papers.

1.5 Handling Misconduct

The editorial board will take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred. In cases of suspected or confirmed misconduct—such as plagiarism, data falsification, or unethical research practices—the editors will follow COPE’s guidelines and may retract or correct articles as necessary.

2. Duties of Reviewers

2.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editors in making editorial decisions and may also assist authors in improving their manuscripts through constructive feedback.

2.2 Promptness

Reviewers should complete reviews within the agreed timeframe. If a reviewer is unable to meet the deadline, they must promptly inform the editor so that alternative reviewers can be assigned.

2.3 Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or disclose manuscript content to others unless authorized by the editorial board.

2.4 Objectivity

Reviews must be conducted objectively. Reviewers should express their views clearly, with supporting arguments, and avoid personal criticism of the authors.

2.5 Acknowledgement of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any suspicion of plagiarism or substantial similarity to another work should be immediately reported to the editor.

2.6 Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest and decline to review manuscripts where such conflicts exist.

3. Duties of Authors

3.1 Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are original and that any sources or prior work are properly cited. All manuscripts submitted to Opinia De Journal are screened using Turnitin plagiarism detection software. Plagiarism in any form is considered unethical and unacceptable.

3.2 Authorship of the Manuscript

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and agree to its submission.

3.3 Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest

Authors must disclose any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

3.4 Data Access and Retention

Authors may be requested to provide raw data in connection with a manuscript for editorial review and must be prepared to make such data available upon reasonable request. Authors should retain such data for a reasonable period after publication.

3.5 Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Submissions

Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is not acceptable.

3.6 Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must be given. Authors should cite publications that have influenced their research.

4. Duties of the Publisher

The publisher, STAINU Madiun, is committed to ensuring that editorial decisions are based solely on scholarly and ethical criteria. The publisher shall work closely with the editorial team to maintain academic integrity, support ethical publishing practices, and, where necessary, assist in investigations concerning ethical breaches.

In cases of alleged misconduct, the publisher will take reasonable steps in cooperation with the editorial board to clarify the situation and, if necessary, to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions, or apologies.