PUBLICATION ETHICS AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENT

Milkiyah: Jurnal Hukum Ekonomi Syariah is committed to the highest publication standards. The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the important responsibilities of the editorial board. The Code describes the “Milkiyah: Jurnal Hukum Ekonomi Syariah” policies for ensuring the ethical treatment of all participants in the peer review and publication process. Milkiyah's Editors, Guest Editors, Reviewers and Authors are encouraged to study these guidelines and address any questions or concerns to the editorial team. 

This publication ethics statement has been developed with reference to relevant guidance and core practices issued by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Editorial Teams

Editor/Guest Editor(s) are responsible for the journal's content and for ensuring the integrity of all work published in it.

• Publication Decisions: The Editor/Guest Editor(s) have the right to decide whether to accept or reject a manuscript concerning the significance, originality, and clarity of the manuscript and its relevance to the journal.
• Anti-plagiarism: Submitted manuscripts will be screened using similarity-detection software. Similarity reports are used as an editorial screening tool and are not, by themselves, treated as conclusive evidence of plagiarism. Any suspected plagiarism, text recycling, or redundant publication will be assessed contextually and handled in accordance with the journal’s publication ethics procedures and relevant COPE guidance.
• Review of Manuscripts: The journal follows a double-anonymous peer-review process, also commonly referred to as double-blind peer review, in which authors do not know the identities of reviewers and reviewers do not know the identities of authors. The Editor/Guest Editor(s) are responsible for securing timely, independent and anonymous peer review from suitably qualified reviewers who have no disqualifying competing interests of all manuscripts submitted to the journal. In addition, the Editor/Guest Editor(s) are responsible for ensuring that the journal has access to an adequate number of competent reviewers. The journal may publish an annual acknowledgement of reviewers who have consented to be named. Reviewer names will not be linked to specific manuscripts or review reports.
• Fair Review: Manuscripts will be evaluated on their scholarly merit, relevance to the journal’s scope, originality, methodological quality, clarity, and contribution to knowledge, without discrimination based on race, colour, ethnicity, nationality, citizenship, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, disability, age, political belief, institutional affiliation, or other characteristics unrelated to scholarly merit.
• Confidentiality of submitted material: The Editor/Guest Editor(s) and the editorial staff will ensure that systems are in place to ensure the confidentiality and protection from misuse of material submitted to the journal while under review and the protection of authors’ and reviewers’ identities and will themselves take all reasonable steps to preserve the confidentiality of authors’ and reviewers’ identities.
• Disclosure: Editors and editorial staff must treat submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Information concerning a manuscript will not be disclosed to anyone other than the authors, assigned reviewers, relevant editorial personnel, or other individuals whose involvement is necessary for the editorial or ethical assessment of the manuscript.
• Conflicts of Interest: Editors must disclose and recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest arising from financial, competitive, collaborative, institutional, personal, or other relationships. Such manuscripts will be reassigned to another qualified editor who has no relevant conflict and who will oversee the review and decision-making process independently.
• Authority: The Editor in Chief must have ultimate authority and responsibility for the Journal. The Editor in Chief should respect the Journal’s constituents (Readers, Authors, Reviewers, Guest Editors, Editorial Staff) and work to ensure the honesty and integrity of the Journal’s contents and continuous improvement in journal quality.

Reviewers

• Fair reviews: Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly and professionally. Reviewers should avoid personal biases in their comments and judgments, and they should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers must provide substantiated and fair reviews. Review reports must avoid personal attacks and not include any material that is defamatory, inaccurate, libellous, misleading, obscene, scandalous, unlawful, or otherwise objectionable, or that infringes any other person’s copyright, right of privacy, or other rights.
• Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. Reviewers should not discuss the manuscript with anyone other than the Editor/Guest Editor(s), nor should they discuss any information from the manuscript without permission.
• Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published work or data sources that have not been appropriately acknowledged where these are known to them. Any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and another published or submitted work of which the reviewer has knowledge should be promptly reported to the editor.
• Timeliness: If a reviewer is unable to complete the review within the specified period, they should promptly inform the editor so that the manuscript can be reassigned without unnecessary delay.
• Right of Refusal and Competing Interests: Reviewers should disclose any financial, institutional, collaborative, competitive, personal, academic, or other relationship that may affect, or reasonably be perceived to affect, their independence. They should also disclose any prior involvement with the manuscript or its authors, including comments on an earlier version. The editor will determine whether the relationship or involvement creates a conflict or compromises independent review. Reviewers who are unable to provide an objective and independent assessment should decline the invitation.
• Complaint: Any complaint relating to the journal should, in the first instance, be directed towards the Editor in Chief of Milkiyah.

Authors

• Originality: Authors must ensure that the submitted work is original and that all words, ideas, data, figures, images, and other materials derived from external sources are appropriately quoted, cited, acknowledged, and used with permission where required. Authors must also appropriately cite and disclose relevant material derived from their own previously published work. The manuscript must not have been published previously, in whole or in substantial part, and must not be submitted simultaneously to another journal.
• Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data; or the drafting or critical revision of the manuscript. All authors must approve the final version, agree to its submission and publication, and accept accountability for the integrity of their contributions. Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the authorship criteria should be acknowledged with their permission. Guest, gift, and ghost authorship are not permitted. Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors must be submitted in writing, explain the reason for the proposed change, and include written agreement from all authors, including any author being added or removed. The journal may investigate disputed authorship and may refer unresolved disputes to the relevant institution.
• Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism: All work in the manuscript should be free of any plagiarism, falsification, fabrication, or omission of significant material. Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism constitute unethical publishing behaviour and are unacceptable. Milkiyah reserves the right to evaluate issues of plagiarism and redundancy on a case-by-case basis.
• Acknowledgements and Conflicts of Interest: Authors may include an acknowledgements section to recognise individuals, institutions, or organisations that contributed to the work but did not meet the criteria for authorship. The inclusion of an acknowledgements section is optional. Where individuals or organisations are named, authors should obtain their permission where appropriate. All sources used in the manuscript must be appropriately cited. Authors must disclose any relevant actual, potential, or perceived conflicts of interest. Where no relevant conflict exists, the inclusion of a separate conflict-of-interest statement is optional.
• Ethical Oversight: Research involving human participants, personal or sensitive data, vulnerable populations, or other matters requiring ethical review must comply with applicable ethical, legal, and institutional requirements. Where required, authors must provide information concerning ethical approval and informed consent. Further requirements are provided in the journal’s Ethical Clearance Policy.
• Intellectual Property: Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted materials do not infringe copyright, privacy, confidentiality, or other intellectual-property rights. Further information is provided in the journal’s Copyright and Licensing Policy.
• Data Access and Retention: Authors should retain the data and materials underlying their work in accordance with applicable legal, ethical, institutional, and funder requirements. Where reasonably requested, authors should provide editors with access to supporting data for verification, subject to participant consent, confidentiality, privacy, data-protection, intellectual-property, and other legitimate restrictions. Any restrictions on data availability should be disclosed in a data-availability statement.
• Timeliness: Authors should be prompt with their manuscript revisions. If an Author cannot meet the deadline given, the Author should contact the “Milkiyah: Jurnal Hukum Ekonomi Syariah” Managing Editor as soon as possible to determine whether a longer time period or withdrawal from the review process should be chosen.
• Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If authors identify a significant error, inaccuracy, or ethical concern in their published work, they must promptly notify the editorial office and cooperate fully with the journal’s assessment. The editor will determine whether a correction, addendum, Expression of Concern, retraction, or other notice is appropriate, taking into account the reliability and integrity of the published record. The journal may proceed with necessary post-publication action even if the authors disagree with the decision or cannot be contacted.

Authorship and Use of Artificial Intelligence

Artificial intelligence tools, including Large Language Models, cannot be listed as authors because they cannot assume responsibility for the submitted work, declare competing interests, or enter into copyright and licensing agreements. Authors who use generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in preparing text, images, or graphical elements, collecting or analysing data, or in other research-related activities where such use is permitted must transparently disclose the name and version of the tool, the purpose for which it was used, and how its output was reviewed and verified. Such use must comply with applicable ethical, legal, institutional, data-protection, and journal requirements. Authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and ethical compliance of all submitted content.

Policy Statement

The editorial team recognises that authors, reviewers, and editors invest substantial effort in the publication process. Nevertheless, concerns affecting the accuracy, reliability, legality, or integrity of a published article may arise after publication. Where necessary, the journal will issue corrections, addenda, Expressions of Concern, retractions, or removal notices in accordance with clearly defined procedures. Such actions will not be taken lightly. The journal is committed to preserving the integrity, transparency, and completeness of the scholarly record.

Use of Generative AI in Peer Review

The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal peer review process is not allowed. When a researcher is invited to review another researcher’s paper, the manuscript must be treated as a confidential document. Reviewers should not upload a submitted manuscript or any part of it into a generative AI tool as this may violate the authors’ confidentiality and proprietary rights and, where the paper contains personally identifiable information, may breach data privacy rights.

This confidentiality requirement extends to the peer review report, as it may contain confidential information about the manuscript and/or the authors. For this reason, reviewers should not upload their peer review report into an AI tool, even if it is just for the purpose of improving language and readability.

Peer review is at the heart of the scientific ecosystem and Milkiyah abides by the highest standards of integrity in this process. Reviewing a scientific manuscript implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by reviewers to assist in the scientific review of a paper as the critical thinking and original assessment needed for peer review is outside of the scope of this technology and there is a risk that the technology will generate incorrect, incomplete or biased conclusions about the manuscript. The reviewer is responsible and accountable for the content of the review report.

Article Retraction

Milkiyah is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. On rare occasions, it may be necessary for the journal to retract an article. An article may be retracted where:

First, there is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct, such as data fabrication or falsification, or an honest error, such as a miscalculation or experimental error, and the problem materially affects the article’s findings or conclusions.

Second, the findings have previously been published elsewhere without appropriate cross-referencing, permission, or justification, constituting redundant or duplicate publication.

Third, there is evidence of serious plagiarism, inappropriate or fraudulent authorship, unethical research, unauthorised use of data or materials, serious copyright or legal infringement, manipulation or compromise of the peer-review process, substantial data or image irregularities, or an undisclosed major competing interest that materially affected the interpretation or evaluation of the work.

To ensure that retractions are handled in accordance with publication best practice, the journal will apply the following procedure:

First, a concern that may warrant retraction will be brought to the attention of the editor and recorded for assessment.

Second, the editor will assess the concern in accordance with the journal’s procedures and relevant COPE guidance. The authors will ordinarily be informed of the concern and given a reasonable opportunity to respond. The journal may seek advice from independent experts and, where appropriate, contact the authors’ institution, research funder, regulatory body, or another relevant organisation.

Third, the final decision will be communicated to the authors and, where appropriate, to other relevant parties. Any communication with third parties will take account of applicable ethical, legal, confidentiality, and data-protection requirements.

Fourth, retraction notices will be published promptly, permanently linked to the retracted article, clearly identified as retractions, and made freely accessible. The notice will identify the retracted article, state who is retracting it, explain the basis and reason for the retraction, and indicate, where appropriate, whether the authors agree or disagree with the decision. The language of the notice will be objective, factual, and non-defamatory. The original article will ordinarily remain accessible as part of the scholarly record but will be clearly marked as retracted.

Authors’ retention of copyright does not give them an automatic right to retract an article after publication. Decisions concerning retraction rest with the journal and publisher and will be made to protect the integrity of the scholarly record in accordance with relevant COPE guidance.

Expression of Concern

The journal may publish an Expression of Concern where serious questions have been raised about the reliability or integrity of a published article, but the available evidence is inconclusive or an investigation is ongoing. The notice will be linked to the article and made freely accessible. Once sufficient information becomes available, the Expression of Concern may be replaced or followed by a correction, retraction, or notice confirming that no further action is required.

Article Correction

The journal will consider issuing a correction where a limited part of an otherwise reliable publication contains an error, reports flawed data, or is misleading, particularly where the problem results from an honest error and does not invalidate the article’s principal findings or conclusions. A correction may also be issued where the author or contributor list is inaccurate, for example, where a qualifying author has been omitted or an individual who does not meet the authorship criteria has been included. Corrections to peer-reviewed content fall into one of three categories:

Publisher correction (erratum): A notice concerning a significant error introduced by the journal or publisher during editorial processing, production, or publication.

Author correction (corrigendum): A notice concerning a significant error made by the authors that affects the publication record but does not invalidate the article’s principal findings.

Addendum: Additional information necessary to clarify, explain, or update an article without undermining the reliability of its principal findings.

The decision on whether a correction should be issued will be made by the journal’s editor(s), where appropriate after consulting reviewers, independent experts, or editorial board members. The handling editor will contact the authors for clarification, but the final decision on whether a correction is required and which type of notice should be issued rests with the journal.

Correction notices will be published promptly, made freely accessible, and linked bidirectionally with the original article. The notice will clearly identify the article, describe the error and the correction made, and state whether the correction affects the interpretation or conclusions. The journal will not make substantive changes to the published record without an accompanying notice.

Article Withdrawal

This journal allows authors to request the withdrawal of a submitted manuscript by sending a written request to the journal’s official email address. The request must state the reasons for withdrawal and provide sufficient manuscript details. For manuscripts with multiple authors, the corresponding author must confirm that all co-authors have been informed of and agree to the request.

Withdrawal requests may be submitted during the submission or peer-review stage. Requests concerning revised or accepted manuscripts will be considered individually, taking into account the reasons for withdrawal, the manuscript’s publication status, and any declaration, copyright transfer, or publication licence signed by the authors. Withdrawal of a revised or accepted manuscript is not inherently unethical.

The journal may investigate a withdrawal request where there are reasonable grounds to suspect simultaneous submission, misuse of the peer-review process, duplicate publication, or an attempt to avoid an investigation into a potential breach of publication ethics. Authors will be informed of the concerns and given an opportunity to respond. Each case will be handled fairly and proportionately in accordance with relevant COPE guidance. The journal does not impose an automatic publication ban solely because a manuscript has been withdrawn.

Withdrawal does not prevent the journal from continuing an investigation into suspected misconduct or from communicating relevant information to another journal, institution, funder, or regulatory body where ethically and legally appropriate.