Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

AL-'ADALAH (p-ISSN 0854-1272e-ISSN 2614-171X) is medium of communication for researchers, lecturers, teachers, practitioners, and University students that covers issues such as the emphasizes specifications in Islamic legal studies and communicates researches related to Islamic legal studies.


 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Peer Review Policy

The Al-‘Adalah is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal. Every paper submitted to the Al-‘Adalah for publication is subject to peer review. The peer review in this journal is an evaluation of the submitted paper by two or more individuals of similar competence to the author. It aims to determine the academic paper's suitability for publication. The peer review method is employed to maintain standards of quality and provide credibility of the papers. The peer review at Al-‘Adalah proceeds in 9 steps with the description as follows.

1. Submission of Paper
The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal. This is carried out via an online system supported by the Open Journal System (OJS). But in order to facilitate authors, Al-‘Adalah temporarily also accepts paper submissions by email.

2. Editorial Office Assessment
The submitted paper is first assessed by the Al-‘Adalah editor. The editor checks whether it is suitable with the Journal focus and scope. The paper's composition and arrangement are evaluated against the journal's Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. In addition, an assessment of the minimum required quality of the paper for publication begins at this step, including one that assesses whether there is a major methodological flaw. Every submitted paper which passes this step will be checked by Turnitin to measure the similarity index which leads to plagiarism before being reviewed by reviewers.

3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief
The Editor-in-Chief checks if the paper is appropriate for the journal, sufficiently original, interesting, and significant for publication. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further.

4. Invitation to Reviewers
The handling editor sends invitations to individuals who he or she believes would be an appropriate reviewer (also known as referees) based on expertise, the closeness of research interest, and no conflict of interest consideration. The peer review process at Al-‘Adalah involves a community of experts in a Islamic law who are qualified and able to perform reasonably impartial review. The impartiality is also maintained by the double-blind peer review employed in this journal. That said, the reviewer does not know the author's identity, conversely, the author does not know the reviewer's identity. The paper is sent to reviewers anonymously.

5. Response to Invitations
Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest, and availability. They then decide to accept or decline. In the invitation letter, the editor may ask the potential reviewer for the suggestion of an alternative reviewer, when he or she declines to review.

6. Review is Conducted
The reviewers allocate time to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewers may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise, they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept, or reject it, or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

7. Journal Evaluates the Reviews
The Editor-in-Chief and handling editor consider all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely between both reviewers, the handling editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to obtain an extra opinion before making a decision.

8. The Decision is Communicated
The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. Reviewer comments is sent anonymously to the corresponding author to take the necessary actions and responses. At this point, reviewers are also be sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review.

9. Final Steps
If accepted, the paper is sent to copy-editing. If the article is rejected or sent back to the author for either major or minor revision, the handling editor will include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. The author should make corrections and revise the paper per the reviewers' comments and instructions.

After revision has been made, the author should resubmit the revised paper to the editor.

If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive the revised version, unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the handling editor.

If the editor is happy with the revised paper, it is considered to be accepted. The accepted papers will be published online and all are freely available as downloadable pdf files.

 

Publication Frequency

Al-'Adalah is a journal published by Fakultas Syariah, Universitas Islam Negeri Raden Intan Lampung, Indonesia. It published twice a year. Number 1-2 are scheduled for publicatio in June and Desember.

 

 

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.

All contents published by Al-'Adalah is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

 

Publication Ethics and Misconducts

Al-‘Adalah is a peer-reviewed journal, published biannually by Fakultas Syariah Universitas Islam Negeri Raden Intan Lampung. It is available online as an open-access source as well as in print. The following section clarifies the ethical behavior of all the parties involved in the act of publishing an article in the journal, including the author, editor-in-chief, the editorial board, the reviewers, and the publisher. This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.


The publication of an article in Al-‘Adalah is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a clear reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody scientific methods. It is therefore important to agree upon the standards of expected ethical behavior for all the parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, editor, reviewers, publisher, and society. The publisher of Al-‘Adalah is obliged to take all the stages of the publishing process seriously and to recognize its ethical standards and other responsibilities. Fakultas Syariah Universitas Islam Negeri Raden Intan Lampung, Indonesia is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprinting or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

Duties of Editors

Publication Decisions

The editor of Al-‘Adalah is responsible for deciding the best eligible articles for publication. The validation of the work in question and its importance for researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors are guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and are constrained by the legal requirements in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making their decisions.

Complaints and Appeals

The Al-‘Adalah journal will have a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board, or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to respected personal concerning the case of a complaint. The scope of complaints includes anything related to the journal business process, i.e., editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guidelines.

Fair Play

Editors will always evaluate manuscripts in terms of their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or the 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 material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer reviews assist the editor in making editorial decisions, and through the editorial communications with authors may also assist them in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referees who feel unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript, or know that a prompt review will be impossible, should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.

Confidentiality

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

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant 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. 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 of Authors

Reporting Standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work undertaken, 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 behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access, Retention and Reproducibility

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, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

In general, authors should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. 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 study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors, while others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project 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 paper and agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If authors discover a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, they should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with them to retract or correct the paper.

Ethical Oversight

If the research work involves chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey the ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal, ethical clearance from an association or legal organization.

If the research involves confidential data and business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing the article by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, Editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and an assessment of whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest.

If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the coauthors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article are sufficient.

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on the evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, the Islamic Guidance and Counseling Journal journal will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

 

Screening for Plagiarism

Manuscript submitted to Al-'Adalah will be screened using Turnitin similarity detection tool. Islamic Guidance and Counseling Journal will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

The Al-'Adalah wants to ensure that all authors are careful and comply with international standards for academic integrity, particularly on the issue of plagiarism.

Plagiarism occurs when an author takes ideas, information, or words from another source without proper credit to the source. Even when it occurs unintentionally, plagiarism is still a serious academic violation and unacceptable in international academic publications.

When the author learns specific information (a name, date, place, statistical number, or other detailed information) from a specific source, a citation is required. (This is only forgiven in cases of general knowledge, where the data is readily available in more than five sources or is common knowledge, e.g., the fact that Indonesia is the most populous Muslim country in the world.)

When the author takes an idea from another author, a citation is required even if the author then develops the idea further. This might be an idea about how to interpret the data, either what methodology to use or what conclusion to draw. It might be an idea about broad developments in a field or general information. Regardless of the idea, authors should cite their sources. In cases where the author develops the idea further, it is still necessary to cite the original source of the idea, and then in a subsequent sentence, the author can explain her or his more developed idea.

When the author takes words from another author, citation and quotation marks are required. Whenever four or more consecutive words are identical to a source that the author has read, the author must use quotation marks to denote the use of another author's original words; just a citation is no longer enough.

The Al-'Adalahtakes academic integrity very seriously, and the editors reserve the right to withdraw acceptance from a paper found to violate any of the standards set out above. For further information, potential authors can contact the editorial office at al.adalah@radenintan.ac.id

 

Article Processing Charges

Al-'Adalah does not charge any submission or publication fees, and no fees are incurred for article processing or for the review process.

Note:
Any translation or proofreading costs are paid by the author. Translation and proofreading services are provided by external parties.

 

Correction and Retraction

Al-'Adalah takes its responsibility to maintain the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record of our content for all end users very seriously. Changes to articles after they have been published online may only be made under the circumstances outlined below. Islamic Guidance and Counseling Journal place great importance on the authority of articles after they have been published and our policy is based on best practice in the academic publishing community.

An Erratum is a statement by the authors of the original paper that briefly describes any correction(s) resulting from errors or omissions. Any effects on the conclusions of the paper should be noted. The corrected article is not removed from the online journal, but notice of erratum is given. The Erratum is made freely available to all readers and is linked to the corrected article.

A Retraction is a notice that the paper should not be regarded as part of the scientific literature. Retractions are issued if there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, this can be as a result of misconduct or honest error; if the findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper referencing, permission, or justification; if the work is plagiarized; or if the work reports unethical research. To protect the integrity of the record, the retracted article is not removed from the online journal, but notice of retraction is given, is made freely available to all readers, and is linked to the retracted article. Retractions can be published by the authors when they have discovered substantial scientific errors; in other cases, the Editors or Publisher may conclude that retraction is appropriate. In all cases, the retraction indicates the reason for the action and who is responsible for the decision. If a retraction is made without the unanimous agreement of the authors, that is also noted. In rare and extreme cases involving legal infringement, the Publisher may redact or remove an article. Bibliographic information about the article will be retained to ensure the integrity of the scientific record.

A Publisher's Note notifies readers that an article has been corrected subsequent to publication. It is issued by the Publisher and is used in cases where typographical or production errors (which are the fault of the Publisher) affect the integrity of the article metadata (such as title, author list or byline) or will significantly impact the readers' ability to comprehend the article. The original article is removed and replaced with a corrected version. Publisher's Notes are freely available to all readers. Minor errors that do not affect the integrity of the metadata or a reader's ability to understand an article and that do not involve a scientific error or omission will be corrected at the discretion of the Publisher.

In such a case, the original article is removed and replaced with a corrected version. The date the correction is made is noted on the corrected article. Authors should also be aware that an original article can only be removed and replaced with a corrected version less than one year after the original publication date. Corrections to an article which has a publication date that is older than one year will only be documented by a Publisher's Note.

The following guideline may also be helpful: COPE Guidelines for Retracting Articles

 

Archiving

Al-'Adalah strives for the constant availability of published articles. With this in mind, Al-'Adalah content is continually archived and preserved its published articles in the library of Universitas Islam Negeri Raden Intan Lampung.

 

Revenue Sources, Advertising, and Direct Marketing

Revenue Sources

The operations of Al-'Adalah are funded by the State (the Ministry of Religious Affairs Republic of Indonesia), i.e., through Daftar Isian Pelaksanaan Anggaran (DIPA) of Universitas Islam Negeri Raden Intan Lampung, Indonesia.

Advertising

Al-'Adalah does not accept advertising from any parties.

Direct Marketing

In promoting the journal and the results of publications to the public, Al-'Adalah tries not to do things detrimental to other parties (e.g., spreading spam) and to avoid misleading information between prospective authors and publishers.

 

Deposit Policy

The submitted version, accepted version, and published version can be deposited in an institutional or other repository of the author’s choice at any time. A few to mention, author(s) may deposit and use the document as follows:

  • on the personal website
  • on the company or institutional repository
  • on subject repositories
  • with individuals requesting personal use for teaching and training within the author's institution, and as part of an author's grant applications or theses/doctorate submissions, etc.

Please visit the journal Copyright Notice make sure that you consult all of related policies on the website to prevent any disputes or doubts. If you have any inquiries, contact Editor al.adalah@radenintan.ac.id.