There are three parties that should consider the ethical policy of Jurnal Anti Korupsi (JAK) is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against publication malpractice. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the principal editor, editorial board members, reviewers­­­­­, and authors. This statement adheres to COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors

ETHICAL POLICY FOR AUTHORS

It is entirely the responsibility of the author to ensure that any manuscript submitted to JAK includes: assurance of originality, acknowledged assistance from co-authors and editors, requisite citations, and is completely free from plagiarism. Authors must understand that plagiarism takes many forms, including inappropriate paraphrasing, which may lead to a misinterpretation of the original source. Additionally, authors must use discretion when knowingly publishing information that may result in harm to those named in their academic work. Information of this kind cannot be published without explicit, written permission from those persons to whom the information pertains.

JAK uses a very strict code of conduct on how to disseminate knowledge. It is always with an editorial deep awareness that all published manuscripts must meet the very high qualified academic standard to protect the integrity of the Journal and author. Additionally, as part of the worldwide networks of open journals, JAK is also committed to providing free issues with highly qualified publications.

All authors that use doctrinal and desk research should ensure that their references provide diverse and balanced information in order to take a neutral position when proposing an argument. Authors that use empirical data should provide enough and rich information in order to help them develop analyses and propositions. The authors must also declare that their manuscript is original and cite all references properly. 

ETHICAL POLICY FOR EDITORS

EDITOR In CHIEF is responsible to determine which articles should be or not be published. Prior to this stage of publication, she/he must also be responsible to determine which submissions to JAK should be sent to the reviewer for further assessment and which other submissions should be declined because they do not meet a minimum standard of the manuscript draft.

EDITORS should be accountable and responsible for everything published in JAK. To ensure that editors can achieve all ethical standards, they must operate under the standard of a double-blind review process to ensure the quality of the manuscript and decide whether the manuscript will be accepted or rejected solely based on its originality, quality, and prospect for knowledge dissemination for readers. Editors are prohibited to apply a discriminative policy by giving priority or discouraging certain authors based on their religion, beliefs, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, or any form of personal background.

All editorial board members are responsible to protect the confidentiality of all authors. They may not reveal all unpublished manuscripts to the third party without any explicit consent from the authors.

The ethics policy may also require Editors to re-check manuscripts before making a decision. Editors are often asked to communicate with reviewers and authors in order to clarify and enrich the substance of manuscripts. This communication will not reduce the authority of editors to accept or decline the manuscripts.

ETHICAL POLICY FOR REVIEWERS

All reviewers must be aware that they are only mandated to review substances, not manuscript layout or language spelling. The layout will be completed by a copy editor while language spelling and grammatical errors will be checked by a copy editor or language proofreader.

All reviewers cannot disclose the confidentiality of the author's information. They are also restricted to disclose the confidentiality of the declined manuscripts to the third party without explicit consent from the authors. They may still explain the standard of review and the reasons for declining or acceptance of a certain submission anonymously to the third party.

All reviewers can decline the offer from the editorial office to review the manuscript if they think there will be a potential conflict of interest between reviewer and author. They can also decline the offer to review the manuscript if they believe their review work will not help authors to enrich the substance of the manuscript.