Aksioreligia : Jurnal Studi Keislaman is committed to maintaining research integrity and an accurate publication record. Allegations concerning submitted manuscripts or published articles will be handled fairly, objectively, and on the basis of evidence, with reference to the guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). An allegation does not, in itself, establish misconduct. The parties concerned will be given an opportunity to provide explanations and supporting evidence before a decision is reached.

1. Scope

This policy covers allegations of fabricated data or sources, falsification of data and research findings, plagiarism, undisclosed duplicate publication, authorship manipulation, peer-review manipulation, and violations of ethical requirements concerning research participants. The journal also addresses allegations of undisclosed relevant conflicts of interest and other practices that may compromise research or publication integrity.

In Islamic studies, differences in interpretation, schools of thought, approaches, or scholarly conclusions do not, in themselves, constitute misconduct. Assessment focuses on the honest use of sources, accurate reporting, appropriate attribution, and the integrity of the research process.

2. Reporting Allegations

Authors, reviewers, readers, institutions, and other parties may report suspected misconduct through the journal’s official contact details provided on the contact page. Reports should identify the manuscript or article, describe the concern specifically, indicate the relevant passages or materials, and include available supporting evidence, such as comparative sources, documents, or verifiable links.

Complainants are encouraged to provide contact information to facilitate clarification. Anonymous reports may also be considered when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information. Further explanation or evidence may be requested before a report can be assessed.

3. Initial Assessment

The editor conducts an initial assessment of the report’s relevance, the adequacy of supporting evidence, and the potential implications for the reliability of the manuscript or article. This assessment may involve comparing sources, examining submission records, and consulting individuals with appropriate expertise.

Similarity-checking software may be used as an assessment tool. A similarity score alone does not establish plagiarism; the editor will consider the context, the nature of the material used, citation practices, and attribution.

4. Clarification and Opportunity to Respond

Where there are sufficient grounds for further examination, the editor contacts the authors or other relevant parties and explains the matters requiring clarification. Authors may be asked to provide data, research records, original sources, ethics approval documentation, evidence of participant consent where applicable, or other relevant materials.

The parties concerned will be given an opportunity to respond within a timeframe specified by the editor. Additional clarification may be requested if the response is insufficient. Failure to respond does not automatically establish misconduct, but the journal may proceed on the basis of the available evidence.

5. Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest

Reports and assessment materials are handled confidentially and shared only with parties whose involvement is necessary to resolve the case. The identity of the complainant will be protected as far as possible, subject to the requirements of the assessment and applicable obligations.

Editors or other individuals with a conflict of interest must not participate in decisions concerning the case. If an allegation involves an editor, responsibility will be transferred to another editor or a person appointed by the publisher who has no conflict of interest. Independent expert assessment may be sought where necessary.

6. Coordination with Institutions

The journal is responsible for editorial decisions and the accuracy of the publication record. Investigating research conduct or the behaviour of researchers may require the authority of the relevant institutions. Where a concern cannot be resolved through editorial clarification or requires a formal investigation, the journal may contact the institution where the research was conducted, the authors’ affiliated institutions, or another competent body.

The journal may request investigation findings relevant to the manuscript or article. Editorial decisions will take account of the available evidence, responses from the parties concerned, and institutional findings. The journal may nevertheless take action to protect readers when sufficient evidence establishes a problem with the publication.

7. Measures During Assessment

For unpublished manuscripts, the journal may suspend peer review or publication until the concern has been clarified. For published articles, the journal may consider issuing an expression of concern where serious questions about integrity or reliability remain unresolved, the evidence is inconclusive, or an investigation is ongoing.

An expression of concern informs readers of unresolved issues and does not constitute a finding of misconduct. It will be followed up when adequate assessment findings become available.

8. Decisions and Follow-Up Actions

The journal’s response will reflect the nature of the concern, the strength of the evidence, and the implications for the publication. Possible outcomes include:

• Closing the case where the allegation lacks sufficient supporting evidence or has been satisfactorily explained.

• Requesting revisions to, or rejecting, an unpublished manuscript.

• Publishing a correction where the error can be addressed without undermining the overall reliability of the article.

• Issuing or updating an expression of concern where serious issues remain unresolved.

• Retracting an article where sufficient grounds exist under the relevant COPE guidance.

Retraction serves to correct the scholarly record and does not necessarily indicate intentional misconduct. Errors that render findings unreliable may also warrant retraction. Correction and retraction notices will explain the reasons for the action and be linked to the affected article. Retracted articles will generally remain available with clear identification of their retracted status to preserve the publication record, except where exceptional circumstances require removal of the content.

9. Communication, Documentation, and Appeals

The journal securely maintains records of reports, evidence, correspondence, and decisions, with access restricted to authorized parties. Relevant parties will be informed of progress or outcomes to the extent possible without compromising confidentiality. The time required to resolve a case will depend on its complexity and the need for coordination with other parties.

A party wishing to challenge a decision may submit an appeal through the journal’s official contact channels, providing clear reasons or additional evidence. Appeals will be considered by an individual without a conflict of interest and, wherever possible, someone who was not involved in the original decision. A case may be reopened if material new evidence becomes available.