Publication Ethics
Constitutional Review committs to maintain the highest standards of academic integrity and publication ethics. To this end, it implements rigorous measures to prevent any form of unethical conduct, including plagiarism, data falsification, and other forms of academic dishonesty. Authors who submit their manuscripts for consideration affirm that their work is entirely original, constitutes their own intellectual contributions, and has not been copied, reproduced, or otherwise derived from other sources without proper acknowledgment. The journal strictly prohibits any form of plagiarism, whether verbatim reproduction or improper paraphrasing, and actively enforces policies to ensure that all submissions adhere to ethical scholarly practices. Any detected violations of these ethical standards will result in appropriate corrective actions, including manuscript rejection, retraction, or other necessary measures in accordance with international publication guidelines. This statement is based on Elsevier's Policies and Ethics and COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journals managed by Constitutional Review plays a crucial role in fostering a well-structured and esteemed knowledge network. Such publications reflect not only the quality of the authors' work but also the credibility of the institutions supporting them. To ensure a high standard of scholarship, Constitutional Review upholds strict principles of Publication Ethics. All parties involved in the journal—authors, editors, peer reviewers, the publisher, and affiliated organizations—are expected to adhere to these ethical guidelines. Any article failing to meet these standards may be removed from publication at any stage.
Furthermore, as the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, we oversee the entire publication process and recognize our ethical responsibilities. We guarantee that editorial decisions remain unaffected by external factors such as advertising, reprints, or other commercial interests. Additionally, the Editorial Board facilitates communication between the journal and other relevant entities, including other journals and publishers, whenever necessary.
To uphold these ethical standards, Constitutional Review establishes the following guidelines:
a. Publication Decisions
The editor of Constitutional Review bears the responsibility for determining the suitability of submitted articles for publication. This decision is based on the academic merit of the work, its validity, and its relevance to researchers and readers. In carrying out this duty, the editor is guided by the policies set by the journal’s editorial board and is bound by applicable legal provisions concerning defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
To ensure a rigorous and objective evaluation, the editor may consult with other editors or peer reviewers in the decision-making process.
b. Fair Play
An editor shall conduct the evaluation of manuscripts exclusively based on their intellectual merit, ensuring that considerations such as the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic background, citizenship, or political ideology do not influence the editorial decision-making process. This commitment to impartiality upholds the principles of academic integrity, fairness, and inclusivity, reinforcing the journal’s dedication to maintaining the highest ethical and scholarly standards.
c. Confidentiality
The editor and all members of the editorial staff are obligated to maintain the confidentiality of any submitted manuscript. Information regarding a manuscript under review must not be disclosed to any individual or entity other than the corresponding author, assigned reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial advisers, and the publisher, as deemed necessary and appropriate. This commitment to confidentiality ensures the integrity of the peer review process and upholds the ethical standards of academic publishing.
d. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Any unpublished material, data, or findings disclosed in a submitted manuscript shall be treated as confidential and must not be used, incorporated, or referenced in an editor’s own research or scholarly work without the explicit and prior written consent of the author. This obligation is essential to maintaining the integrity of the editorial and peer review process, preventing conflicts of interest, and safeguarding the intellectual property rights of the authors. Editors are expected to uphold the highest ethical standards in handling confidential submissions and to ensure that no undue advantage is taken of privileged information obtained through the editorial process.
Duties of Reviewers
a. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
The peer review process serves a critical function in assisting the editor in making informed editorial decisions regarding the suitability of a manuscript for publication. Reviewers provide an independent assessment of the quality, originality, and significance of the research presented. Furthermore, through constructive feedback and critical evaluation, reviewers contribute to enhancing the clarity, coherence, and scholarly rigor of the manuscript. Their comments may assist authors in refining their arguments, improving the structure of their work, and addressing any methodological or theoretical shortcomings. In this way, the peer review process ensures the maintenance of high academic and ethical standards in scholarly publishing.
b. Timeliness and Professional Responsibility
Reviewers should acknowledge their professional responsibility by completing the review process within the stipulated timeframe. If a reviewer feels unqualified to evaluate the research content of a manuscript or anticipates being unable to complete the review in a timely manner due to other commitments, they should promptly notify the editor. Timely communication allows the editorial team to seek alternative reviewers and prevents unnecessary delays in the publication process. Reviewers who accept an assignment should make a genuine effort to fulfill their obligations within the agreed-upon deadline.
c. Confidentiality and Ethical Considerations
All manuscripts submitted for peer review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers are expected to uphold the ethical principles of scholarly publishing by refraining from discussing, sharing, or disclosing any information related to the manuscript with unauthorized individuals. The content of the manuscript, its findings, and any associated data must not be used for personal research or any other purpose that could compromise the integrity of the review process. If consultation with a colleague is necessary to improve the quality of the review, prior authorization from the editor must be obtained. Maintaining confidentiality is paramount to preserving the integrity and impartiality of the peer review process.
d. Objectivity, Fairness, and Constructive Criticism
Reviewers are expected to conduct their evaluations with the highest degree of objectivity, impartiality, and professionalism. Criticism should be directed toward the content of the manuscript rather than the author’s personal attributes. Comments should be well-reasoned, supported by evidence, and framed in a constructive manner to help authors improve their work. Subjective, biased, or overly harsh assessments that lack justification should be avoided. The review should focus on the clarity of arguments, the appropriateness of methodology, the validity of findings, and the contribution of the research to the field.
e. Identification and Acknowledgment of Sources
Reviewers play a crucial role in ensuring that all relevant and significant scholarly works are properly cited within the manuscript. They should carefully examine the references and alert the authors to any important studies that may have been overlooked. If a particular argument, observation, or research finding has been previously published, reviewers should request appropriate citation of the original source. Additionally, if a reviewer detects substantial similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and any other published work known to them, they should immediately bring this to the editor’s attention. Proper citation practices uphold academic integrity and prevent issues related to plagiarism or redundant publication.
f. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest
Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may compromise their ability to provide an unbiased assessment of a manuscript. Conflicts of interest may arise due to professional, financial, personal, or institutional relationships with the authors, funding bodies, or affiliated institutions. If a reviewer believes that their objectivity may be affected due to a competitive or collaborative connection with any of the authors, they should decline the review assignment and inform the editor. Furthermore, any privileged information or insights gained through the peer review process should not be used for personal gain or competitive advantage. Reviewers must act with integrity to uphold the credibility and fairness of the peer review system.
By adhering to these principles and responsibilities, reviewers contribute significantly to maintaining the credibility, accuracy, and ethical standards of academic publishing. Their diligence and commitment ensure that scholarly research remains a reliable and valuable resource for the academic community and beyond.
Duties of Authors
a. Adherence to Reporting Standards
Authors submitting original research must provide a truthful, precise, and thorough account of their study, including a clear and objective discussion of its significance. The data presented should be accurately represented, ensuring that findings are not manipulated or misrepresented. Sufficient detail and appropriate references should be included in the manuscript to allow other researchers to replicate the study. Any fabrication, falsification, or deliberate misrepresentation of data constitutes unethical conduct and is strictly unacceptable in academic publishing.
b. Originality and Avoidance of Plagiarism
Authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscript is entirely original. If the work of others has been incorporated, whether in the form of ideas, data, or direct quotations, it must be properly cited or referenced in accordance with ethical academic standards. Plagiarism, including self-plagiarism (text recycling), misattribution, and unauthorized use of intellectual property, is a serious ethical violation and is not tolerated.
c. Restrictions on Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications
Authors must not submit the same research findings to multiple journals simultaneously, as doing so constitutes unethical publishing behavior. A manuscript should not be republished in multiple primary sources unless explicitly permitted and appropriately justified. Redundant publication, including the submission of closely related or substantially overlapping manuscripts to different journals without disclosure, is discouraged and may result in manuscript rejection or retraction.
d. Proper Acknowledgment of Sources
Authors must appropriately credit all sources that have influenced their research. All relevant prior work, including foundational studies and key references that have shaped the research question, methodology, or findings, must be properly cited. Failure to acknowledge intellectual contributions made by others may be considered a breach of ethical authorship practices.
e. Authorship Criteria and Responsibilities
Authorship should be attributed only to individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All individuals who have made such substantial contributions should be recognized as co-authors. Other individuals who have provided ancillary contributions, such as technical support or data collection, should be acknowledged separately. The corresponding author holds the responsibility of ensuring that:
- All appropriate contributors are listed as co-authors, and no ineligible individuals are included as authors.
- Each co-author has reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.
- All co-authors have consented to the manuscript’s submission for publication.
Ghost authorship (where significant contributors are omitted) and guest authorship (where individuals with little or no contribution are included) are unethical and must be avoided.
f. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest and Funding Sources
Authors must disclose any financial, personal, or professional relationships that could be perceived as influencing their research findings or interpretations. Potential conflicts of interest, including funding sources, institutional affiliations, or personal relationships that may create a bias, should be explicitly stated in the manuscript. Furthermore, all sources of financial support for the study must be disclosed to ensure transparency and maintain the credibility of the research.
g. Responsibility for Errors in Published Works
If an author identifies a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they have an ethical obligation to notify the journal editor or publisher immediately. Authors must cooperate in retracting or correcting the paper to prevent the dissemination of incorrect or misleading information. Retractions and corrections should follow established publishing guidelines to maintain the integrity of the scholarly record.
By adhering to these ethical guidelines, authors contribute to the advancement of knowledge while ensuring the integrity, credibility, and reliability of scholarly publications.