Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

We are interested in topics which relate generally to Law issues in Indonesia and around the world. Articles submitted might cover topical issues in :

  • Civil Law
  • Criminal Law
  • Civil Procedural Law
  • Criminal Procedure Law
  • Commercial Law
  • Constitutional Law
  • International Law
  • State Administrative Law
  • Adat Law
  • Islamic Law
  • Agrarian Law
  • Environmental Law 


 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

VARIA Hukum is applying the double-blind review process. The authors are welcome to suggest at least three potential reviewers along with their name and email addresses. However, the decision to determine the appropriate reviewers is the right of the editor. The approved gallery proof of manuscript will early viewed online as early as possible upon received from the author and final proofreading by editor in chief.


Plagiarism and self-plagiarism are not allowed. A software tool may be used so that the submitted articles are screened for plagiarism. Detection of overlapping and similar text is used there and so quotations and appropriate citations have to be used whenever required. It is basically the author’s duty to only submit a manuscript that is free from plagiarism and academically malpractices. The editor, however, double checks each article before its publication. The first step is to check plagiarism against the offline database by VARIA Hukum Editorial Board and, secondly, against as many as possible online databases.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Publication Ethics

VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan (P-ISSN 2085-1154 E-ISSN 2798-7663) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Law Studies Program, Faculty of Sharia and Law, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of posting an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewers and the publisher. This statement based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Duties and Ethical Guideline of Publisher in VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-review VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore essential to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer-reviewer, the publisher and the society. 

Faculty of Sharia and Law UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung as publisher of VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or additional commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. Besides, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung and the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Duties and Ethical Guideline of Chief Editor in VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan

  1. Evaluate manuscripts fairly and solely on their intellectual merit.
  2. Ensure confidentiality of manuscripts and not disclose any information regarding manuscripts to anyone other than the people involved in the publishing process.
  3. Has the responsibility to decide when and which articles are to be published.
  4. Actively seek the views of board members, reviewers and authors on how to improve/ increase the image and visibility of the journal.
  5. Give clear instructions to potential contributors on the submission process and what is expected of the authors.
  6. Ensure appropriate reviewers are selected/ identified for the reviewing process.

Duties and Ethical Guideline of Editor in VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan

Publication decisions, The editor of the VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play, An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality, The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest, Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not use in an editor's research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties and Ethical Guideline of Reviewer in VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan

Contribution to Editorial Decisions. Peer-reviewers assist the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also help the author in improving the paper.

Promptness, Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality, Any manuscripts received for review must be considered as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity, Peer-review process should conduct objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources, Peer-reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument reported should accompany by the appropriate citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest, Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer-review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Peer-reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties and Ethical Guideline of Authors in VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan

Reporting standards, Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical ehavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention, Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism, The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original actions and if the authors have used the works, or words of others that this has appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication, An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same paper concurrently to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources, Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be provided. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper, Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the article and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Fundamental errors in published works, When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Research Involving Human Subjects

Authors/researchers who submit research with human subjects have at least followed the rules according to the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 and amended in 2013 (click here). Prior to conducting research, permission must be obtained from the local Institutional Review Board (IRB) or other appropriate ethics committee. Authors/Researchers and articles that will be published in the VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan are required to follow the rules below before submitting articles involving human research.

  1. Medical research involving human subjects must conform to generally accepted scientific principles, be based on a thorough knowledge of the scientific literature, other relevant sources of information, and on adequate laboratory and, where appropriate, animal experimentation.
  2. Appropriate caution must be exercised in the conduct of research which may affect the environment, and the welfare of animals used for research must be respected.
  3. The design and performance of each experimental procedure involving human subjects should be clearly formulated in an experimental protocol. This protocol should be submitted for consideration, comment, guidance, and where appropriate, approval to a specially appointed ethical review committee, which must be independent of the investigator, the sponsor or any other kind of undue influence. This independent committee should be in conformity with the laws and regulations of the country in which the research experiment is performed. The committee has the right to monitor ongoing trials. The researcher has the obligation to provide monitoring information to the committee, especially any serious adverse events. The researcher should also submit to the committee, for review, information regarding funding, sponsors, institutional affiliations, other potential conflicts of interest and incentives for subjects.
  4. The research protocol should always contain a statement of the ethical considerations involved and should indicate that there is compliance with the principles enunciated in this Declaration.
  5. Medical research involving human subjects should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons and under the supervision of a clinically competent medical person. The responsibility for the human subject must always rest with a medically qualified person and never rest on the Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 2001, 79 (4) # World Health Organization 2001 373 subject of the research, even though the subject has given consent. 16. Every medical research project involving human subjects should be preceded by careful assessment of predictable risks and burdens in comparison with foreseeable benefits to the subject or to others. This does not preclude the participation of healthy volunteers in medical research. The design of all studies should be publicly available.
  6. Physicians should abstain from engaging in research projects involving human subjects unless they are confident that the risks involved have been adequately assessed and can be satisfactorily managed. Physicians should cease any investigation if the risks are found to outweigh the potential benefits or if there is conclusive proof of positive and beneficial results.
  7. Medical research involving human subjects should only be conducted if the importance of the objective outweighs the inherent risks and burdens to the subject. This is especially important when the human subjects are healthy volunteers. 19. Medical research is only justified if there is a reasonable likelihood that the populations in which the research is carried out stand to benefit from the results of the research.
  8. The subjects must be volunteers and informed participants in the research project.
  9. The right of research subjects to safeguard their integrity must always be respected. Every precaution should be taken to respect the privacy of the subject, the confidentiality of the patient’s information and to minimize the impact of the study on the subject’s physical and mental integrity and on the personality of the subject. 22. In any research on human beings, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail. The subject should be informed of the right to abstain from participation in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. After ensuring that the subject has understood the information, the physician should then obtain the subject’s freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be obtained in writing, the non-written consent must be formally documented and witnessed.
  10. When obtaining informed consent for the research project the physician should be particularly cautious if the subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In that case the informed consent should be obtained by a well-informed physician who is not engaged in the investigation and who is completely independent of this relationship.
  11. For a research subject who is legally incompetent, physically or mentally incapable of giving consent or is a legally incompetent minor, the investigator must obtain informed consent from the legally authorized representative in accordance with applicable law. These groups should not be included in research unless the research is necessary to promote the health of the population represented and this research cannot instead be performed on legally competent persons.
  12. When a subject deemed legally incompetent, such as a minor child, is able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the investigator must obtain that assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorized representative.
  13. Research on individuals from whom it is not possible to obtain consent, including proxy or advance consent, should be done only if the physical/mental condition that prevents obtaining informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research population. The specific reasons for involving research subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent should be stated in the experimental protocol for consideration and approval of the review committee. The protocol should state that consent to remain in the research should be obtained as soon as possible from the individual or a legally authorized surrogate.
  14. Both authors and publishers have ethical obligations. In publication of the results of research, the investigators are obliged to preserve the accuracy of the results. Negative as well as positive results should be published or otherwise publicly available. Sources of funding, institutional affiliations and any possible conflicts of interest should be declared in the publication. Reports of experimentation not in accordance with the principles laid down in this Declaration should not be accepted for publication.

Note: Authors are required to prepare:

  1. An ethical statement can look like this: "Before taking part in the study, all subjects expressed their informed agreement to be included. The research was carried out in conformity with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the XXX (Project identification code) Ethics Committee." (upload licensing documents in suplementary file)
  2. The project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board must all be provided in the article's Section 'Institutional Review Board Statement.

Ethics approval for survey design

All participants in non-interventional studies (such as surveys, questionnaires, and social media research) must be thoroughly informed about whether anonymity is guaranteed, why the research is being undertaken, how their data will be used, and whether there are any risks involved. Prior to conducting the study, ethical approval from an appropriate ethics commission must be acquired, as with all human research. If ethical approval is not necessary, authors must either obtain an exemption from the ethics committee or cite local or national legislation stating that this type of study does not require ethical approval. If an exemption has been obtained for a study, the name of the ethics committee that approved it should be listed in Section 'Institutional Review Board Statement,' along with a detailed explanation of why ethical approval was not necessary.

Complaint

Authors who may have complaints about their interactions with the VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan team (Editor and Staff) can send an e-mail to the Editor-in-Chief at ilmu.hukum@uinsgd.ac.id

Disclaimer

The Editors of Internasional Journal of islamic Khazanah and UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Jurnal Journals make every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in its publications. However, the Editors of VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan and UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung Journals make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness or suitability for any purpose of the Content and disclaim all such representations and warranties whether express or implied to the maximum extent permitted by law.

 

References Management

In writing Citation and Bibliography, VARIA HUKUM uses the Mendeley Reference Management Software.

 

Retraction and/or Corrections

Authors are discouraged from withdrawing submitted manuscripts after it is in the publication process (review, copyedit, layout, etc.,). During the time, VARIA HUKUM had spent valuable resources besides time spent in the process. Should under any circumstances that the author(s) still request for a withdrawal, author(s) should pay back every effort put into the manuscript processes at an amount of IDR 1.000.000 (US $70). Paid upon official request from the author(s) in an email sent to VARIA HUKUM editor using the same email address used in correspondence.

VARIA HUKUM editors shall consider retracting a publication if:

  1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of a major error (eg, miscalculation or experimental error) or as a result of fabrication (eg, of data) or falsification (eg, image manipulation);
  2. It constitutes plagiarism;
  3. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources or disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (ie, cases of redundant publication);
  4. It contains material or data without authorisation for use;
  5. Copyright has been infringed or there is some other serious legal issue (eg, libel, privacy);
  6. It reports unethical research;
  7. It has been published solely based on a compromised or manipulated peer review process;
  8. The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (a.k.a. conflict of interest) that, in the view of the editor, would have unduly affected interpretations of the work or recommendations by editors and peer reviewers

Notices of retraction would:

  1. Be linked to the retracted article wherever possible (ie, in all online versions);
  2. Clearly identify the retracted article (eg, by including the title and authors in the retraction heading or citing the retracted article);
  3. Be clearly identified as a retraction (ie, distinct from other types of correction or comment);
  4. Be published promptly to minimise the harmful effects;
  5. Be freely available to all readers (ie, not behind access barriers or available only to subscribers);
  6. State who is retracting the article;
  7. State the reason(s) for retraction;
  8. Be objective, factual and avoid inflammatory language

Retractions are not usually appropriate if:

  1. The authorship is disputed but there is no reason to doubt the validity of the findings;
  2. The main findings of the work are still reliable and correction could sufficiently address errors or concerns;
  3. An editor has inconclusive evidence to support retraction or is awaiting additional information such as from an institutional investigation;
  4. Author conflicts of interest have been reported to the journal after publication, but in the editor’s view, these are not likely to have influenced interpretations or recommendations or the conclusions of the article.

VARIA HUKUM editors shall consider issuing an expression of concern if:

  1. they receive inconclusive evidence of research or publication misconduct by the authors;
  2. there is evidence that the findings are unreliable but the authors’ institution will not investigate the case;
  3. they believe that an investigation into alleged misconduct related to the publication either has not been or would not be, fair and impartial, or conclusive;
  4. an investigation is underway but a judgment will not be available for a considerable time

VARIA HUKUM editors shall consider issuing a correction if:

  1. a small portion of an otherwise reliable publication proves to be misleading (especially because of honest error);
  2. the author/contributor list is incorrect (i.e. a deserving author has been omitted or somebody who does not meet authorship criteria has been included);

 

Publication Frequency

VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan will be published in January And July

 

Plagiarism Notices

VARIA HUKUM: Jurnal Forum Studi Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan editorial board recognises that plagiarism is not acceptable and therefore establishes the following policy stating specific actions (penalties) upon identification of plagiarism/similarities in articles submitted for publication in VARIA HUKUM. VARIA HUKUM will use Turnitin's originality checking software as the tool in detecting similarities of texts in article manuscripts and the final version of articles ready for publication. A maximum of 20% of similarities is allowed for the submitted papers. Should we find more than 20% of the similarity index, the article will be returned to the author for correction and resubmission.

Level of Plagiarism

Minor: A short section of another article is plagiarised without any significant data or idea taken from the other paper.

Action: A warning is given to the authors and a request to change the text and properly cite the original article is made

Intermediate: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarised without proper citation to the original paper.

Action: The submitted article is rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for one year

Severe: A significant portion of a paper is plagiarized that involves reproducing original results or ideas presented in another publication.

Action: The paper is rejected and the authors are forbidden to submit further articles for five years.

It is understood that all authors are responsible for the content of their submitted paper as they all read and understand Varia Hukum Copyright and Licensing Terms. If a penalty is imposed for plagiarism, all authors will be subject to the same penalty.

Note. The acceptance limit is 20% without references.