Publication Ethics

At LAREH LAW REVIEW, we are committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and ensuring the integrity of the academic record. The journal adheres to the ethical guidelines outlined by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). These principles apply to all parties involved in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher.

1. Ethical Responsibilities of Authors

1.1 Originality and Plagiarism

Authors must ensure that their work is original and free from plagiarism. Submitted manuscripts must not contain any form of plagiarism, including the use of others’ words, ideas, or results without proper attribution. The journal utilizes plagiarism detection tools to verify the originality of all submitted manuscripts. Any manuscript found to contain plagiarized material will be rejected immediately.

1.2 Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must appropriately cite and acknowledge all sources that have contributed to the development of their research. Proper credit must be given to all relevant previous works, and direct quotations or paraphrased material must be properly cited.

1.3 Data Integrity and Falsification

Authors are responsible for the accuracy of the data presented in their research. Data falsification, fabrication, or selective reporting of data to support conclusions is strictly prohibited and constitutes scientific misconduct. Authors should retain their raw data and be prepared to provide it upon request for editorial review.

1.4 Authorship and Contributorship

Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study. All individuals who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors, and all co-authors should approve the final version of the manuscript before submission. "Honorary" or "gift" authorship is not permitted. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all authors meet these criteria.

1.5 Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time. Submitting a manuscript to multiple journals concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Articles that have been previously published or are under consideration elsewhere will not be accepted.

1.6 Conflict of Interest Disclosure

Authors are required to disclose any financial or non-financial conflicts of interest that may influence the interpretation of their research. This includes affiliations, funding, or any other personal or professional relationships that could be perceived as influencing the research. All potential conflicts of interest must be declared upon submission.

1.7 Reporting Standards

Authors must present an accurate account of their research and provide an objective discussion of its significance. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are considered unethical and unacceptable. Authors should provide sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the work.

1.8 Human and Animal Rights

For research involving human or animal subjects, authors must adhere to ethical standards and provide proof of approval by relevant institutional review boards (IRB) or ethics committees. Authors must ensure informed consent has been obtained from all participants, and confidentiality is maintained.

2. Ethical Responsibilities of Reviewers

2.1 Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review is an essential component of the scholarly publication process, and reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the quality of the journal. Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and timely evaluations of submitted manuscripts. Their assessments help the editors make informed decisions on whether to accept, reject, or request revisions for the manuscript.

2.2 Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents. They must not share, discuss, or disclose any details of the manuscript with anyone except the editorial team. Reviewers are also prohibited from using any information from the manuscript for personal or professional gain before its publication.

2.3 Objectivity and Fairness

Reviewers should provide objective and constructive feedback that is free from personal bias. Criticism should be specific and focused on the content of the manuscript. Reviewers must assess the manuscript’s quality, methodology, and contribution to the field without regard to the authors’ personal characteristics, nationality, gender, or affiliations.

2.4 Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment. If a reviewer feels that their personal or professional relationships with the authors could influence their objectivity, they must decline to review the manuscript.

3. Ethical Responsibilities of Editors

3.1 Editorial Independence

Editors at LAREH LAW REVIEW have full responsibility for deciding which manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published. The decision to publish a manuscript is based on its originality, relevance to the field, methodological rigor, and contribution to legal scholarship. Editorial decisions are free from commercial, personal, or institutional influences.

3.2 Fair Play

Editors evaluate all manuscripts without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. Editorial decisions are based solely on the manuscript’s intellectual content and contribution to the journal.

3.3 Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must ensure the confidentiality of manuscripts during the review process. They must not disclose any information about the submitted manuscript to anyone outside of the editorial team and assigned reviewers.

3.4 Handling Conflicts of Interest

Editors must recuse themselves from the editorial process if they have a conflict of interest regarding a manuscript, such as a personal or professional relationship with the authors. Manuscripts submitted by editors or members of the editorial board must undergo the same peer-review process as all other submissions.

3.5 Allegations of Misconduct

Editors have a responsibility to investigate any allegations of research or publication misconduct, such as plagiarism, falsification of data, or unethical research practices. In cases of proven misconduct, the journal will follow COPE guidelines, which may include retraction of the published article, issuing an expression of concern, or notifying the relevant authorities.

4. Publisher Responsibilities

4.1 Ethical Oversight

The publisher of LAREH LAW REVIEW, the Faculty of Law, Universitas Andalas, is committed to ensuring that all articles published in the journal adhere to ethical guidelines. The publisher works closely with the editorial team to ensure that best practices are followed at every stage of the publishing process, from submission to final publication.

4.2 Archiving and Preservation

The publisher ensures that all published content is preserved through trusted digital archiving services to guarantee long-term access to the journal’s content.

5. Handling Complaints and Appeals

LAREH LAW REVIEW has established a clear process for handling complaints and appeals related to editorial decisions, misconduct allegations, and other ethical concerns. Authors, reviewers, or readers who have concerns may submit a formal complaint to the editorial team. All complaints will be handled confidentially and impartially, following COPE’s best practices. Appeals regarding rejected manuscripts must be submitted in writing with detailed justification, and they will be reviewed by an independent editorial committee.