Allegations of Research Misconduct

Verdict: Journal of Law Science, published by CV Wahana Publikasi, is committed to maintaining the integrity, reliability, and transparency of the scholarly record. The journal takes allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously and is committed to handling such allegations fairly, confidentially, consistently, and in accordance with the principles and relevant guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

This policy applies to allegations concerning manuscripts submitted to the journal, manuscripts undergoing peer review, accepted manuscripts, and articles that have already been published. The policy applies to authors, co-authors, reviewers, editors, and other parties involved in the research and publication process.

The journal's primary responsibility is to safeguard the integrity of the scholarly record. Where an allegation concerns the conduct of a researcher, the journal may refer the matter to the relevant institution or research-integrity body, which is normally responsible for conducting a formal investigation into the researcher's conduct.


1. Definition of Research and Publication Misconduct

Research and publication misconduct refer broadly to conduct or practices that may compromise the reliability, integrity, originality, attribution, or transparency of the scholarly record, for examples:

  • fabrication of data, research participants, results, or other research materials;
  • falsification, manipulation, alteration, or inappropriate omission of research data or results;
  • plagiarism or substantial unattributed use of another person's work;
  • duplicate or redundant publication;
  • simultaneous or inappropriate multiple submission;
  • inappropriate or disputed authorship and contributorship;
  • citation manipulation;
  • manipulation or falsification of the peer-review process;
  • inappropriate manipulation of figures, images, or other research materials;
  • failure to disclose relevant conflicts of interest;
  • unethical research practices or failure to obtain required ethical approval or informed consent;
  • unauthorized use of data, materials, or confidential information;
  • misrepresentation of research methods, results, or sources.

The journal recognizes that honest errors, legitimate differences in scholarly interpretation, and good-faith academic disagreements do not automatically constitute research misconduct. However, such matters may still require correction if they affect the reliability of the published record. This broad approach is consistent with COPE's guidance, which considers misconduct in terms of practices that may affect the reliability of the research record, including findings, conclusions, or attribution.


2. Reporting Allegation

Any individual or organization may report a suspected case of research or publication misconduct to the journal. Reports may be submitted by:

  • authors or co-authors;
  • readers;
  • reviewers;
  • editors;
  • researchers;
  • research institutions;
  • employers;
  • research organizations;
  • funding organizations; or
  • other individuals who have credible concerns or evidence.

All allegations should be submitted through the journal's official email: verdict.jls@gmail.com.

 To facilitate assessment, the complainant should provide, where available:

  1. the title of the manuscript or published article;
  2. the name(s) of the author(s);
  3. the DOI or other publication details, if applicable;
  4. a clear description of the alleged misconduct;
  5. specific evidence supporting the allegation; and
  6. relevant documents, data, publications, or other supporting materials.

The journal may consider anonymous allegations, particularly where the complainant has credible and specific evidence. The journal will not attempt to identify a whistleblower who has chosen to remain anonymous. This procedure follows COPE's guidance that allegations should be assessed on the basis of specific and detailed evidence and that anonymous whistleblowers should not be unnecessarily identified.

If an allegation is too vague or lacks sufficient evidence to permit meaningful assessment, the journal may request additional information from the complainant. If sufficient information is not provided, the journal may decide that no further action can reasonably be taken.


3. Initial Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor of the journal will conduct an initial assessment. The initial assessment will determine:

  • whether the allegation falls within the scope of this policy;
  • whether the allegation contains sufficient information or evidence;
  • whether the concern relates to research or publication integrity;
  • whether the concern concerns a submitted manuscript or a published article;
  • whether the issue may be resolved through clarification or correction; and
  • whether the matter requires referral to the relevant institution or research-integrity body.

The editor will assess the allegation objectively and will not assume that the allegation is either true or false before the available evidence has been considered. Where necessary, the Editor-in-Chief may consult another editor, an appropriate subject expert, or the Publisher (CV Wahana Publikasi), while maintaining appropriate confidentiality. Any editor who has a personal, professional, or financial conflict of interest in the matter must not participate in the assessment or decision-making process.


4. Investigation and Author Response

Where an allegation provides sufficient grounds for further assessment, the journal will normally contact the corresponding author and, where necessary, the other relevant authors. The authors will be given an opportunity to respond and may be asked to provide:

  • an explanation of the allegation;
  • clarification of the research methods or findings;
  • original or supporting research data;
  • ethical approval or informed-consent documentation, where applicable;
  • information concerning authorship or contributorship;
  • evidence concerning the originality of the work; or
  • other documentation relevant to the allegation.

The journal will consider the author's response together with the available evidence before determining an appropriate editorial action. The journal will make reasonable efforts to provide authors with an opportunity to respond before taking significant editorial action. However, where immediate action is necessary to protect the integrity of the scholarly record, the journal may take appropriate interim measures. If the authors do not respond within a reasonable period, the journal may proceed using the evidence available to it and, where appropriate, refer the matter to the relevant institution. The journal does not consider a failure to respond, by itself, to constitute proof of misconduct.


5. Cooperation with Institutions

Where an allegation raises serious concerns about the conduct of a researcher, the journal may contact the author's institution, employer, research-integrity office, or another appropriate authority. In this case, the journal recognizes the distinction between the responsibilities of a journal/publisher and those of a research institution. The institution is responsible for investigating the conduct of its researchers, while the journal is responsible for determining whether the manuscript or published article requires editorial action to protect the scholarly record. However, the journal will cooperate with an institutional investigation to:

  • notify the relevant institution of serious concerns;
  • provide relevant evidence supporting the concern;
  • respond to reasonable requests for information;
  • consider the findings of an institutional investigation; and
  • make appropriate corrections, Expressions of Concern, or retractions where the published record is affected.


6. Confidentiality and Whistleblower Protection

The journal will treat allegations and related communications as confidential to the extent reasonably possible. Information concerning an allegation will be shared only with individuals who reasonably need access to it for assessment or investigation, including relevant editors, the Publisher, appropriate experts, or the relevant institution.

  • The journal will make reasonable efforts to protect the identity of whistleblowers who request anonymity or confidentiality.
  • The journal does not tolerate retaliation, intimidation, harassment, or other adverse treatment against individuals who raise concerns in good faith.
  • The journal will not attempt to identify or expose an anonymous whistleblower unless disclosure is required by law or is necessary for a legitimate investigative or legal process. Because confidentiality may be subject to legal, institutional, or investigative requirements, the journal cannot guarantee absolute confidentiality in every circumstance.