Complaints & Appeals Policy
Complaints and Appeals Policy
Justitia Nova: Indonesian Journal of Modern Law is committed to maintaining fairness, transparency, accountability, and integrity throughout its editorial and publication processes. The journal recognizes the right of authors, reviewers, readers, and other relevant stakeholders to raise legitimate concerns regarding editorial procedures, publication practices, or decisions. To ensure that such concerns are handled appropriately, the journal provides a formal mechanism for submitting complaints and appealing editorial decisions.
All complaints and appeals are handled objectively, fairly, confidentially, and independently, with due consideration of the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the journal's established publication policies.
Purpose and Scope
This policy is intended to promote transparency and accountability in editorial decision-making, ensure fair treatment of all participants in the publication process, and provide a clear and structured mechanism for addressing complaints and appeals. The policy also seeks to protect the editorial independence of Justitia Nova and maintain confidence in the integrity of its scholarly publishing practices.
Complaints may concern editorial procedures, the peer review process, publication ethics, research integrity, conflicts of interest, publication delays, alleged misconduct involving authors, reviewers, editors, or other parties, as well as copyright and licensing matters. Concerns should relate to a specific journal process, decision, or publication matter and should provide sufficient information to enable the Editorial Office to conduct an appropriate assessment.
Submission of Complaints
Complaints should be submitted in writing to the Editorial Office through the official communication channels provided by the journal. The complainant should provide a clear description of the concern, relevant details concerning the matter, and supporting evidence where available.
Upon receipt, the Editorial Office will acknowledge the complaint and conduct an initial assessment to determine its nature, relevance, and the appropriate procedure for addressing it. Where additional information is necessary, the journal may request clarification or supporting documentation from the complainant or other relevant parties.
Appeals Against Editorial Decisions
Authors may submit an appeal when they have reasonable grounds to believe that a significant procedural error occurred during the editorial process, that the decision was based on a material factual misunderstanding, that relevant evidence was not adequately considered, or that an undisclosed conflict of interest may have affected the decision.
An appeal must provide a clear and substantive explanation of the grounds for reconsideration and should be supported by relevant evidence where appropriate. An appeal should address specific procedural or substantive concerns rather than simply express disagreement with the outcome.
A difference of academic opinion with reviewers, by itself, does not constitute sufficient grounds for an appeal. Authors should demonstrate why the editorial process may have been materially affected by an error, misunderstanding, omission, or other circumstance that warrants reconsideration.
Investigation and Assessment
Following receipt of a complaint or appeal, the Editorial Office will conduct an initial assessment of the matter. Depending on the nature and seriousness of the concern, the journal may seek additional information from the relevant author, reviewer, editor, or other parties involved in the matter.
Where appropriate, the Editor-in-Chief may consult members of the Editorial Board, independent subject experts, or other qualified individuals who can provide an impartial assessment. Individuals with a conflict of interest in relation to the matter under investigation shall not participate in the relevant decision-making process.
Investigations will be conducted in a fair, objective, proportionate, and confidential manner. The journal will consider the available evidence and applicable editorial, ethical, and publication policies before reaching a decision.
Possible Outcomes
Following the assessment of a complaint or appeal, Justitia Nova may uphold the original editorial decision where the journal determines that the decision was appropriately made. Depending on the circumstances, the journal may also request additional peer review, reconsider the manuscript, correct an administrative or procedural error, or take other appropriate editorial or ethical action.
Where a complaint raises concerns regarding publication ethics or research integrity, the journal may initiate a separate investigation in accordance with its relevant publication ethics, research integrity, plagiarism, correction, retraction, or withdrawal policies.
The final decision following completion of the appeal process shall normally rest with the Editor-in-Chief. Where appropriate, the Editor-in-Chief may delegate the assessment to an independent editor to ensure that the matter is handled impartially.
Confidentiality and Protection of Parties
The journal will protect the confidentiality of individuals involved in complaints and appeals to the extent reasonably possible. Information concerning a complaint or appeal will be shared only with individuals who have a legitimate role in assessing or resolving the matter, or where disclosure is required by applicable legal, ethical, or institutional obligations.
The journal will seek to ensure that complainants, authors, reviewers, editors, and other parties are treated respectfully throughout the process. The submission of a legitimate complaint or appeal shall not, in itself, prejudice an individual's future interactions with the journal.
Good-Faith Submissions
Complaints and appeals should be submitted in good faith and should be based on factual information or reasonable grounds. The journal does not consider complaints or appeals to be an appropriate mechanism for personal attacks, harassment, intimidation, or attempts to improperly influence editorial decisions.
The Editorial Office may decline to consider complaints that are abusive, defamatory, frivolous, repetitive without substantive new information, or unsupported by credible evidence. Repeated submissions concerning a matter that has already been appropriately investigated and resolved may not receive further consideration unless significant new information is presented.
Independence of the Process
The handling of complaints and appeals shall remain independent of commercial, financial, institutional, or personal interests. No complaint or appeal may influence editorial decisions through external pressure or preferential treatment.
Where a member of the Editorial Board has a direct interest in the matter under consideration, responsibility for the assessment may be transferred to another qualified editor or independent party to protect the fairness and credibility of the process.
Continuous Improvement
Complaints and appeals provide an important source of information for improving editorial governance and publication practices. The Editorial Board may periodically review the nature and outcomes of complaints and appeals, while maintaining appropriate confidentiality, to identify opportunities for strengthening editorial procedures, peer review practices, publication ethics, communication, and transparency.
Such review is intended to support continuous improvement without compromising the confidentiality of individual cases.
Commitment to Fair Editorial Practice
Justitia Nova: Indonesian Journal of Modern Law is committed to ensuring that complaints and appeals are handled fairly, respectfully, transparently, and independently. Through a structured and accountable process, the journal seeks to provide appropriate mechanisms for addressing legitimate concerns, protecting editorial independence, and maintaining trust in the integrity of its editorial decisions and published scholarly record.