Law Review Article With Statistics in It Checked by Law Review

• Focus and Scope
• Section Policies
• Peer Review Process
• Publication Frequency
• Open Access Policy
• Archiving
• Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges (APCs)
• Plagiarism Policy
• Indexing and Abstracting

Focus and Scope

Hasanuddin Constabulary Review (HALREV) is an open access and peer-reviewed journal that aims to offer an international bookish platform forcantankerous-edge legal researchinmultiple governance policies and civil rights law, particularly in developing and emerging countries. These may include but are non limited to various fields such equally: ceremonious law, criminal law, constitutional and administrative police force, customary institution law, religious jurisprudence law, international regime law, legal pluralism governance, and another section related to contemporary issues in legal scholarship.

Section Policies

Articles

Book Review

Editors

• Zulfan Hakim
• Ahsan Yunus

Editorial

Peer Review Process

Editor in Chief will assign the manuscript to Managing Editor for further handling. The Managing Editor will request at least two scientists to review the enquiry article manuscript. All manuscripts are subject field todouble-blind peer-review, both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review procedure to run across standards of academic excellence.

Detailed data about the flow for the manuscript submission (author) to the acceptance by the editor is shown in the following effigy.

In curt, the steps are:

1. Manuscript Submission (by writer)(road 1)
2. Manuscript Check and Selection (by manager and editors)(route 2). Editors have a right to straight accept, decline, or review. Prior to further processing steps, plagiarism check using Turnitin is applied for each manuscript.
3. Manuscript Reviewing Process (past reviewers)(route iii-4)
4. Notification of Manuscript Credence, Revision, or Rejection (by editor to author based on reviewers comments)(route 5)
5. Paper Revision (by writer)
6. Revision Submission based on Reviewer Suggestion (by author) with the similar menses to point number ane.(route 1)
7. If the reviewer seems to exist satisfied with revision, notification for acceptance (by editor).(route half dozen)
8. Galley proof and publishing procedure(road 7 and 8)

The steps point number ane to v are considered as 1 round of the peer-reviewing process (meet the grayness area in the effigy). The editor or editorial board considers the feedback provided by the peer reviewers and arrives at a decision. The following are the most mutual decisions:

• Accepted, as it is. The journal will publish the paper in its original form;
• Accepted by Minor Revisions, the periodical will publish the paper and asks the author to brand small corrections(allow authors revised with stipulated time);
• Accepted by Major Revisions, the journal will publish the newspaper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors(let authors revised with stipulated time);
• Resubmit (conditional rejection), the journal is willing to reconsider the newspaper in another round of conclusion making after the authors make major changes;
• Rejected (outright rejection), the journal volition not publish the newspaper or reconsider it even if the authors brand major revisions.

Publication Frequency

Hasanuddin Constabulary Review (HALREV) is a journal published by Faculty of Law, Hasanuddin University iii times a year in Apr, Baronial and December.

Open Access Policy

This periodical provides immediate open admission to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS organisation to create a distributed archiving organization among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

Publication Ethics

Delight consummate and return this course and retaining a re-create for your records.

Hasanuddin Police force Review (Hasanuddin Law Rev. - HALREV) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Kinesthesia of Law Hasanuddin University. The periodical is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against whatever publication malpractices. All authors submitting their works to the journal for publication as original manufactures attest that the submitted works represent their authors' contributions and have not been copied or plagiarized in whole or in role from other works. This statement is based onElsevier'southward Policies and Ethics andCOPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Periodical Publication.The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal of Hasanuddin Police Review is an essential building cake in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to hold upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the deed of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society.

Faculty of Police Hasanuddin Academy as the publisher of HALREV takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and we recognize our upstanding beliefs and other responsibilities.

Duties of Authors

1. Reporting Standards:Authors of reports or original research should present an authentic business relationship of the work performed as well every bit an objective word of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to allow others to replicate the piece of work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
2. Data Admission and Retention:Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public admission to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Argument on Information and Databases), if practicable, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time later on publication.
3. Originality and Plagiarism:The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works. If the authors take used the work and/or words of others and then information technology has to be appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's ain newspaper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), and/or to claiming results from enquiry conducted past others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication:An author should not, in general, publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than ane journal or chief publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one periodical concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
5. Acknowledgement of Sources:Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must ever be given. Authors should cite publications that accept been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
6. Authorship of the Paper:Authorship should exist express to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or estimation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed every bit co-authors. Where in that location are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the enquiry project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The respective author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and canonical the last version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of involvement that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works:When an writer discovers a meaning error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author'southward obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
9. Hazards and Human or Beast Subjects:If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Duties of Editors

1. Fair Play:An editor at whatsoever fourth dimension evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, indigenous origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
2. Confidentiality: The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, every bit appropriate.
3. Disclosure and Conflicts of Involvement:Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not exist used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
4. Publication Decisions:The editor lath journal are responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the piece of work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements every bit shall so be in forcefulness regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this conclusion.
5. Review of Manuscripts:The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and utilise peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the data for authors and also point which parts of the periodical are peer-reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.

Duties of Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions:Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the newspaper.
2. Promptness:Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and alibi himself from the review process.
3. Standards of Objectivity:Reviews should exist conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
4. Confidentiality:Whatsoever manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not exist shown to or discussed with others except as authorized past the editor.
5. Disclosure and Conflict of Involvement:Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must exist kept confidential and non used for personal reward. Reviewers should non consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
6. Acknowledgement of Sources:Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited past the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or statement had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant commendation. A reviewer should also telephone call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Article Processing Charges (APCs)

Hasanuddin Law Reviewwelcomes commodity submissions and does not accuse Article Processing Charges (APCs).

Article Submission: 0.00 (USD)
Authors are non required to pay an Commodity Submission Fee as role of the submission process to contribute to review costs.

Article Publication Charges (APCs): 0.00 (USD)

For Libraries/Individuals, can read and download whatsoever full-text articles for costless of charge.

Plagiarism Policy

• Plagiarism and cocky-plagiarism are not allowed;
• The authors should ensure that they accept written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted;
• An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than than 1 periodical or chief publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable;
• Proper acknowledgment of the piece of work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Working Procedure:

1. Editorial Squad checking manuscript on offline and online database manually (checking proper citation and quotation);
2. Editorial Squad checking manuscript by using Turnitin app. If it is found plagiarism indication (more than 25%), the board will reject the manuscript immediately.

martincansid.blogspot.com

Source: http://pasca.unhas.ac.id/ojs/index.php/halrev/about/editorialPolicies

Share this post