Complaints and Appeals Policy

Policy Statement

Jurnal Indo-Islamika, published by the Graduate School of UIN Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta, Indonesia, recognizes the right of authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders to raise legitimate concerns regarding editorial procedures, professional conduct, and decisions affecting the publication process.

This policy establishes a transparent and impartial framework for submitting, evaluating, and resolving editorial complaints and appeals. Its primary purpose is to promote procedural fairness, institutional accountability, and confidence in the journal's editorial management.

The policy is informed by the principles and recommended practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly those relating to complaints, appeals, and editorial accountability.

1. Distinction Between Complaints and Appeals

For the purposes of this policy, complaints and appeals are treated as two distinct forms of editorial correspondence.

A complaint concerns dissatisfaction with the conduct, administration, communication, or procedural management of the journal. It may relate to unreasonable editorial delays, inadequate communication, perceived procedural unfairness, inappropriate professional conduct, or failures to follow published editorial policies.

An appeal is a formal request to reconsider a specific editorial decision concerning a manuscript. An appeal must identify a substantive reason why the original decision may have been based on a material factual error, significant misunderstanding, undisclosed conflict of interest, or procedural irregularity.

An ordinary inquiry about manuscript status is not automatically considered a formal complaint. Similarly, disagreement with a reviewer's scholarly opinion does not, by itself, constitute sufficient grounds for an appeal.

2. Scope of Editorial Complaints

Jurnal Indo-Islamika considers complaints involving the journal's editorial services, administrative processes, or professional responsibilities.

Complaints may concern:

1. Editorial communication: Unreasonable delays in responding to substantive inquiries or providing necessary information about editorial procedures.

2. Procedural compliance: Apparent failure to follow the journal's published submission, review, or editorial decision procedures.

3. Professional conduct: Inappropriate, discriminatory, or otherwise unprofessional behavior in editorial communication.

4. Confidentiality concerns: Suspected improper handling of privileged manuscript information or editorial correspondence.

5. Administrative irregularities: Inconsistencies or errors in editorial administration, author information, or publication-related procedures.

6. Editorial impartiality: Concerns that a relevant conflict of interest may have affected the handling of a manuscript.

Complaints relating primarily to suspected research misconduct, plagiarism, or the reliability of published research are addressed through the journal's relevant dedicated policies.

3. Submission of Complaints

Complaints should be submitted in writing to the editorial office through the journal's official communication channel.

A formal complaint should contain sufficient information to allow the editorial team to identify and evaluate the concern.

The submission should include:

• The complainant's name, affiliation, and contact information, where available.

• The manuscript title and submission identification number, or article DOI when applicable.

• A clear description of the issue, including relevant dates and previous communication.

• Supporting correspondence, documents, or other relevant evidence.

• A statement explaining the clarification or resolution being requested.

The editorial office may request additional information when the submitted explanation is incomplete.

Anonymous complaints containing specific and verifiable evidence may be considered when the circumstances justify further assessment. However, the absence of contact information may limit the journal's ability to communicate the outcome.

Official Email: indoislamika@uinjkt.ac.id

Suggested Email Subject: Editorial Complaint – Manuscript ID or Article DOI

Contact Page: https://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/indo-islamika/about/contact

4. Complaint Assessment and Resolution

Complaints should be handled through a fair, documented, and proportionate process.

Upon receipt, the editorial office should register the complaint and determine whether it concerns editorial administration, professional conduct, procedural compliance, or another matter within the journal's responsibilities.

Where the complaint involves a routine administrative issue, the editorial office may resolve the matter through clarification, correction of information, or appropriate communication with the complainant.

Substantive complaints should be reviewed by an editor or designated representative who has no relevant conflict of interest.

The assessment may involve examining editorial correspondence, reviewing applicable journal procedures, consulting relevant individuals, and requesting explanations from the parties concerned.

Where a complaint identifies a procedural deficiency, the journal should consider corrective measures appropriate to the circumstances.

The complainant should receive a written response explaining the outcome, subject to confidentiality restrictions.

Complex complaints requiring additional consultation should be handled without unnecessary delay, with progress information communicated when appropriate.

5. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors may request reconsideration of an editorial decision when they believe that a significant factual, procedural, or evaluative error has materially affected the outcome.

An appeal may be considered when it demonstrates one or more of the following grounds:

Material factual error: The editorial decision or review assessment relies on demonstrably incorrect information concerning the manuscript.

Substantial misunderstanding: A central research question, methodological approach, source, analytical procedure, or scholarly contribution has been materially misunderstood.

Procedural irregularity: The manuscript was not handled in accordance with an applicable and published editorial procedure.

Potential conflict of interest: Credible information indicates that an undisclosed or inadequately managed conflict may have compromised the impartiality of the editorial assessment.

Relevant additional evidence: Substantive information is presented that directly addresses a decisive concern underlying the original editorial decision.

Appeals must be supported by reasoned arguments and relevant documentation.

Differences in theoretical orientation, interpretive perspective, or scholarly judgment are not sufficient grounds for reconsideration unless a material error or procedural concern can be demonstrated.

6. Appeal Submission and Review Procedure

An appeal should ordinarily be submitted by the corresponding author on behalf of the author group.

The request should identify the manuscript, the editorial decision being challenged, the specific grounds for reconsideration, and the evidence supporting the appeal.

Authors are encouraged to respond directly and systematically to the relevant editorial or reviewer comments rather than restating the manuscript's general contribution.

Appeals should be submitted through the journal's official email or an applicable OJS communication channel.

Suggested Email Subject: Editorial Appeal – Manuscript ID

Upon receipt, the journal should conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the appeal raises a substantive issue that warrants reconsideration.

Where reconsideration is justified, the appeal may be assessed by an editor not directly involved in the disputed decision or by another suitably qualified editorial representative.

Additional independent academic advice may be sought when the appeal concerns technical, methodological, or disciplinary questions requiring further expertise.

Reconsideration does not automatically require a new round of external peer review.

The result of an appeal may involve confirmation of the original decision, clarification or amendment of the decision, reconsideration by an independent editor, or further editorial assessment.

Submission of an appeal does not guarantee acceptance, publication, or reversal of the original decision.

7. Editorial Independence and Escalation

Complaints and appeals should be assessed by individuals who can exercise independent judgment and have no relevant conflict of interest.

Where a concern directly involves the handling editor, another qualified editor should be assigned to evaluate the matter.

Where a complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief or raises a substantial issue regarding editorial leadership, the matter should be referred to an appropriate, uninvolved representative of the institutional publisher for impartial consideration.

Where the institutional publisher itself is implicated, appropriate independent advice should be sought.

The involvement of an independent representative is intended to preserve procedural fairness and does not automatically transfer scholarly decision-making authority to individuals without relevant editorial responsibilities.

8. Confidentiality, Fair Treatment, and Protection Against Retaliation

Jurnal Indo-Islamika seeks to ensure that complaints and appeals are addressed respectfully, professionally, and without inappropriate discrimination.

Information submitted during the process should be disclosed only to individuals whose participation is necessary for evaluating and resolving the concern, or where disclosure is otherwise required.

The identity of peer reviewers should remain protected in accordance with the journal's double-blind review procedures, unless disclosure is independently authorized or required.

Complainants and appellants should be treated fairly, and submitting a substantiated concern in good faith should not result in retaliatory editorial treatment.

Individuals whose conduct or decisions are questioned should be given an appropriate opportunity to explain the relevant circumstances.

The journal should distinguish legitimate criticism from abusive communications, knowingly misleading representations, and repeated submissions that do not present substantive new information.

9. Communication of Outcomes and Further Reconsideration

Decisions concerning formal complaints and appeals should be communicated in writing, with an explanation appropriate to the matter under consideration.

Where an editorial decision is upheld, the communication should identify the essential reasons for maintaining that decision.

Where a procedural deficiency is identified, the journal should consider appropriate corrective action and, where necessary, improvements to its editorial procedures.

The journal may ordinarily limit reconsideration of the same editorial decision to one substantive appeal. Additional reconsideration may be considered when significant new evidence or an unresolved procedural concern justifies further review.

The completion of an appeal does not remove an author's right to raise a separate, substantiated concern regarding subsequent editorial conduct.

10. Documentation and Continuous Improvement

The editorial office should maintain confidential records of formal complaints and appeals, including their subject matter, supporting documentation, relevant correspondence, assessment procedures, and outcomes.

Such records support institutional accountability, consistency in editorial decision-making, and the identification of recurring procedural problems.

Where appropriate, lessons arising from resolved complaints may inform revisions to editorial communication practices, manuscript-handling procedures, reviewer guidance, or journal administration.

This policy should be reviewed periodically to ensure its continued relevance to the journal's editorial operations and recognized principles of responsible scholarly publishing.

11. Related Journal Policies

This policy is concerned specifically with complaints about editorial administration and requests for reconsideration of editorial decisions.

Other scholarly and publication-related concerns should be referred to the relevant dedicated policies of Jurnal Indo-Islamika.

Publication Ethics: https://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/indo-islamika/PublicationEthics

Peer Review Process: https://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/indo-islamika/PeerReviewProcess

Plagiarism Policy: https://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/indo-islamika/PlagiarismPolicy

Editorial Contact: https://journal.uinjkt.ac.id/index.php/indo-islamika/about/contact

Reference Framework

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Ethics Toolkit for a Successful Editorial Office: A COPE Guide. Version 2, December 2022.

https://doi.org/10.24318/AkFpEBd1

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.12

Jurnal Indo-Islamika is committed to maintaining fair and accountable editorial procedures by providing appropriate opportunities for stakeholders to raise concerns, request reasoned reconsideration, and seek resolution through transparent and impartial processes.