Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

 

Al-Tafaqquh: Journal of Islamic Law is a peer-reviewed journal, published twice a year [January and July] by UMI, Muslim University of Indonesia. It is available online as open access sources as well as in print. Al-Tafaqquh: Journal of Islamic Law publishes articles in Islamic Law.

The Journal invites original articles and not simultaneously submitted to anotherjournal or conference.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

The submitted manuscript is first reviewed by an editor. It will be evaluated in the office, whether it is suitable for Al-Tafaqquh: Journal of Islamic Law or has a major methodological flaw and similiarity score by using iThenticate.

The manuscript will be sent to at least two anonymous reviewers (Single Blind Review). Reviewers' comments are then sent to the corresponding author for necessary actions and responses.

The suggested decision will be evaluated in an editorial board meeting. Afterwards, the editor will send the final decision to the corresponding author.

 

Publication Frequency

This Journal is published two times a year (Jannuary and July)

 

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.

 

Policy of Screening for Plagiarism

Papers submitted to Al-Tafaqquh: Journal of Islamic Law will be screened for plagiarism using CrossCheck/iThenticate plagiarism detection tools. Al-Tafaqquh: Journal of Islamic Law will immediately reject papers leading to plagiarism or self-plagiarism.

Before submitting articles to reviewers, those are first checked for similarity/plagiarism tool, by a member of the editorial team. The papers submitted to Al-Tafaqquh: Journal of Islamic Law must have similarity level less than 20%.

Plagiarism is the exposing of another person’s thoughts or words as though they were your own, without without permission, credit, or acknowledgment, or because of failing to cite the sources properly. Plagiarism can take diverse forms, from literal copying to paraphrasing the work of another. In order to properly judge whether an author has plagiarized, we emphasize the following possible situations:

  • An author can literally copy another author’s work- by copying word by word, in whole or in part, without permission, acknowledge or citing the original source. This practice can be identified through comparing the original source and the manuscript/work who is suspected of plagiarism.

  • Substantial copying implies for an author to reproduce a substantial part of another author, without permission, acknowledge or citation. The substantial term can be understood both in terms of quality as quantity, being often used in the context of Intellectual property. Quality refers to the relative value of the copied text in proportion to the work as a whole.

Paraphrasing involves taking ideas, words or phrases from a source and crafting them into new sentences within the writing. This practice becomes unethical when the author does not properly cite or does not acknowledge the original work/author. This form of plagiarism is the more difficult form to be identified.

 

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Section A: Publication and authorship 

  1. All submitted papers are subject to strict peer-review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.

  2. Review process are blind peer review.

  3. The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.

  4. The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.

  5. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.

  6. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.

  7. The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

  8. No research can be included in more than one publication. 

Section B: Authors’ responsibilities

  1. Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.

  2. Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.

  3. Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. 

  4. Authors must participate in the peer review process. 

  5. Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.

  6. All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.

  7. Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.

  8. Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.

  9. Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.

  10. Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors. 

Section C: Reviewers’ responsibilities

  1. Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information. 

  2. Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author

  3. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments

  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.

  5. Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

  6. Reviewers should not review 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. 

Section D: Editors’ responsibilities

  1. Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.

  2. Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.

  3. Editors should always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication.

  4. Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.

  5. Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.

  6. Editors should have a clear picture of a research’s funding sources.

  7. Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers’ importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication’s scope.

  8. Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason. 

  9. Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers. 

  10. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.

  11. Editors should only accept a paper when reasonably certain.

  12. Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.

  13. Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.

  14. Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.