Allegations of Research Misconduct

FOCUS: Jurnal of Law, published by the Faculty of Law, Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Cirebon, Indonesia, is committed to maintaining high standards of research integrity, publication ethics, and academic responsibility in legal scholarship. The journal takes all allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously and is committed to addressing such concerns fairly, objectively, confidentially, and transparently.

This policy is developed with reference to the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), particularly its Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and guidelines for addressing publication ethics concerns. These principles are applied in conjunction with the journal's Publication Ethics Policy and relevant editorial policies concerning corrections, retractions, and other post-publication actions.

1. Scope of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct refers to actions that compromise the integrity, reliability, originality, or credibility of research and scholarly publications. Such actions may include, but are not limited to:

• Fabrication: Inventing research data, findings, legal documents, case information, or other research materials and presenting them as authentic.

• Falsification: Manipulating research data, legal evidence, documents, research processes, or findings in a manner that misrepresents the results or conclusions of a study.

• Plagiarism: Using another person's words, ideas, legal arguments, research findings, or intellectual contributions without appropriate acknowledgment or citation.

• Redundant or Duplicate Publication: Publishing substantially overlapping research or previously published material without proper disclosure, acknowledgment, cross-referencing, or academic justification.

• Authorship Misconduct: Inappropriately assigning, excluding, or misrepresenting authorship, including guest authorship, honorary authorship, or the omission of legitimate contributors.

• Citation Manipulation: Deliberately using inappropriate, irrelevant, misleading, or excessive citations to distort the scholarly record or manipulate citation metrics.

• Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest: Failing to disclose relevant financial, institutional, professional, or personal interests that may influence research findings, interpretations, or editorial decisions.

• Research Ethics Violations: Failing to comply with applicable ethical standards, legal requirements, confidentiality obligations, informed consent procedures, or personal data protection principles where relevant.

• Publication Process Manipulation: Engaging in deceptive practices that compromise the integrity of peer review, editorial evaluation, or publication decisions.

• Misuse of Artificial Intelligence: Using artificial intelligence tools in ways that compromise research originality, accuracy, transparency, confidentiality, or academic integrity, including the fabrication of legal citations, judicial decisions, or research findings.

Honest errors, reasonable differences in legal interpretation, legitimate academic criticism, and good-faith scholarly disagreements do not automatically constitute research misconduct. Each allegation will be assessed according to its specific circumstances and the available evidence.

2. Reporting Allegations

Any individual, including authors, reviewers, readers, researchers, legal practitioners, or members of the academic community, who has reasonable grounds to suspect research misconduct involving a manuscript submitted to FOCUS: Jurnal of Law or an article published in the journal may report the concern to the Editorial Board.

Reports should be submitted through the journal's official editorial contact, as provided on the FOCUS: Jurnal of Law Contact Page.

Reports should include sufficient information to facilitate an initial assessment, including, where available:

1. The title, author(s), and DOI or URL of the relevant published article, or identifying information concerning the submitted manuscript.

2. A clear, factual, and detailed description of the suspected misconduct.

3. Supporting evidence, such as relevant publications, legal documents, research data, citation records, or other verifiable information.

4. The reporting individual's contact information, where the individual is willing to provide it.

FOCUS: Jurnal of Law encourages allegations to be submitted in good faith and supported by relevant evidence. Anonymous reports may also be considered when sufficient information is provided to permit a meaningful assessment.

All allegations will be handled with appropriate confidentiality and in accordance with relevant publication ethics principles. The submission of an allegation does not, by itself, establish that research misconduct has occurred.

3. Preliminary Assessment

Upon receiving a report of suspected research misconduct, the Editorial Board of FOCUS: Jurnal of Law will conduct a preliminary assessment to determine whether the allegation falls within the scope of this policy and whether the available information warrants further examination.

The preliminary assessment may involve reviewing the submitted manuscript or published article, examining supporting evidence, evaluating relevant legal and academic references, consulting editorial records, and requesting additional information or clarification where necessary.

The Editorial Board will assess the credibility, relevance, and seriousness of the reported concerns. Particular attention will be given to allegations involving plagiarism, falsified research findings, fabricated legal references, misrepresentation of judicial decisions, and other violations affecting the reliability of legal scholarship.

Where an allegation appears to warrant further investigation, the Editorial Board will proceed in accordance with relevant COPE guidance and the journal's applicable editorial policies.

4. Investigation and Opportunity to Respond

When further examination is warranted, the Editorial Board will conduct an appropriate editorial inquiry and, where necessary, refer the matter to the author's affiliated institution, research organization, or another competent authority for formal investigation.

Depending on the nature and seriousness of the allegation, the investigation may involve:

1. Reviewing the available evidence, relevant publications, legal sources, research materials, and editorial records.

2. Requesting explanations, clarifications, or supporting documentation from the author(s) concerned.

3. Consulting independent academic experts, legal scholars, reviewers, or editorial advisers where appropriate.

4. Seeking clarification from the author's institution or another competent authority when further investigation is necessary.

5. Evaluating the findings and determining an appropriate editorial response based on the available evidence.

Authors and other relevant parties will be given a reasonable opportunity to respond to substantive concerns before an editorial decision is made, where appropriate.

FOCUS: Jurnal of Law recognizes that an editorial investigation does not replace a formal institutional or legal investigation when such an investigation is necessary.

The Editorial Board will refer to relevant COPE guidelines and flowcharts when addressing specific allegations and determining appropriate corrective measures.

5. Confidentiality, Impartiality, and Conflicts of Interest

FOCUS: Jurnal of Law is committed to handling allegations of research misconduct with appropriate confidentiality, impartiality, fairness, and professional responsibility.

Information concerning allegations, supporting evidence, editorial correspondence, and investigation findings will be treated confidentially to the extent reasonably possible, consistent with applicable legal obligations and the requirements of a fair investigation.

The identities of individuals reporting suspected misconduct and those subject to allegations will be protected where appropriate. Information will be disclosed only to individuals or institutions with a legitimate role in assessing or resolving the matter.

Editorial decisions must be made objectively and independently, without discrimination, personal bias, institutional pressure, or inappropriate external influence.

Editors who have actual or potential conflicts of interest concerning a particular allegation must withdraw from handling the case. Where necessary, another qualified editor without a relevant conflict of interest will be assigned to oversee the assessment.

All parties involved are expected to act in good faith, maintain professional conduct, and cooperate with legitimate editorial inquiries.

6. Editorial Decisions and Corrective Actions

Following the assessment or investigation of an allegation, the Editorial Board of FOCUS: Jurnal of Law will determine whether further editorial action is necessary.

Any decision or corrective action will be proportionate to the nature, severity, and consequences of the identified misconduct and consistent with the journal's publication ethics principles and applicable COPE guidance.

Depending on the circumstances, possible editorial actions may include:

1. Taking no further action when the allegation is unsupported or does not establish a violation of publication ethics.

2. Requesting clarification, additional evidence, or corrective action from the author(s).

3. Publishing a correction, corrigendum, erratum, or addendum to address errors or inaccuracies in a published article.

4. Issuing an expression of concern when substantial questions regarding the integrity or reliability of an article remain unresolved.

5. Retracting a published article when sufficient evidence demonstrates serious misconduct or findings that are substantially unreliable.

6. Rejecting a submitted manuscript or suspending its editorial processing when serious ethical concerns remain unresolved.

7. Referring the matter to the author's affiliated institution, research organization, or another competent authority when further investigation is justified.

For published articles, appropriate corrective actions will be taken in accordance with the journal's applicable Correction and Retraction Policy and relevant COPE recommendations.

Any correction, expression of concern, or retraction will be documented and communicated transparently, with appropriate reference to the original publication.

The primary purpose of corrective action is to preserve the accuracy, reliability, and integrity of the scholarly record rather than to impose punitive measures.

7. Appeals and Reconsideration

Authors or other directly affected parties may request reconsideration of an editorial decision concerning an allegation of research misconduct by submitting a reasoned explanation and relevant supporting evidence to the Editorial Board.

Requests for reconsideration should clearly identify the decision being challenged and explain the grounds for the appeal.

The Editorial Board will evaluate appeals fairly and objectively, taking into account whether the available evidence was properly considered and whether the relevant editorial procedures and publication ethics principles were followed.

Where appropriate, the reconsideration process may be conducted by an editor who was not directly involved in the original decision and who has no relevant conflict of interest.

The submission of an appeal does not automatically suspend or invalidate an editorial action that has already been taken.

The final decision regarding reconsideration will be determined by the Editorial Board in accordance with the journal's editorial authority and applicable publication ethics standards.

8. Record Keeping and Follow-up

FOCUS: Jurnal of Law will maintain appropriate records of reported allegations, supporting evidence, editorial correspondence, investigation findings, and decisions made during the handling of research misconduct cases.

These records will be managed in accordance with applicable confidentiality, institutional, and personal data protection requirements.

When allegations are referred to an affiliated institution, research organization, or competent authority, the Editorial Board may consider the findings of that institution or authority when determining whether further editorial action is necessary.

The journal may periodically review its editorial procedures and publication ethics practices based on the outcomes of cases handled to promote transparency, consistency, accountability, and continuous improvement.

FOCUS: Jurnal of Law recognizes that maintaining research integrity requires ongoing cooperation among authors, reviewers, editors, publishers, and academic institutions.

9. Policy Framework and Contact

This policy should be read in conjunction with the relevant editorial and publication policies of FOCUS: Jurnal of Law, particularly:

• Publication Ethics

• The journal's applicable Plagiarism Policy

• The journal's applicable Correction and Retraction Policy

• Author Guidelines

FOCUS: Jurnal of Law refers to the principles and guidance of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) when addressing allegations of research misconduct and related publication ethics concerns.

COPE guidelines and flowcharts serve as important references for evaluating allegations, determining appropriate editorial responses, and maintaining the integrity of scholarly publications.

Reports of suspected research misconduct should be submitted through the official editorial contact of FOCUS: Jurnal of Law.

Editorial Office — FOCUS: Jurnal of Law

Faculty of Law, Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Cirebon
Jl. Perjuangan No. 17, Karyamulya, Kesambi, Cirebon, West Java 45131, Indonesia
Email: focus.law@untagcirebon.ac.id
Official Website: https://jurnal.publikasi-untagcirebon.ac.id/index.php/focus

Through this policy, FOCUS: Jurnal of Law seeks to promote responsible research practices, ensure the fair and transparent handling of allegations of research misconduct, and maintain the integrity, reliability, and credibility of scholarly publications in the field of law.