Author Guidelines

Guide for Authors, Manuscript Preparation, Research Integrity, and Submission Requirements

1. Introduction and General Publishing Policy

JURISTA: Jurnal Hukum dan Keadilan is an international-oriented, peer-reviewed, open-access academic journal dedicated to publishing original, high-quality, and theoretically informed legal research.

The journal aims to advance scholarly knowledge concerning law, justice, legal institutions, constitutionalism, human rights, legal pluralism, and the interaction between law and society.

JURISTA welcomes contributions from researchers, university lecturers, legal scholars, postgraduate researchers, legal professionals, and interdisciplinary academics representing diverse jurisdictions and intellectual traditions.

Manuscripts submitted to JURISTA are evaluated on the basis of their originality, intellectual contribution, theoretical significance, methodological rigour, analytical depth, and relevance to contemporary legal scholarship.

The journal promotes internationally recognised principles of scholarly publishing, informed by the editorial standards and publication-ethics guidance of Elsevier and the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Authors must carefully read these guidelines before submitting manuscripts. Submissions that do not satisfy the journal's editorial, technical, or ethical requirements may be returned for correction or rejected during preliminary screening.

Compliance with these guidelines does not guarantee acceptance for publication.

2. Aims and Scope

JURISTA publishes original research addressing significant issues in national, regional, comparative, international, and transnational law.

The journal particularly encourages manuscripts presenting original conceptual frameworks, significant doctrinal interpretations, comparative legal insights, empirical socio-legal findings, or policy-relevant contributions with implications beyond an individual case.

Manuscripts that merely summarise legislation, reproduce judicial decisions, or describe existing legal doctrines without critical analysis or original scholarly contribution are generally unsuitable for publication.

3. Types of Manuscripts

JURISTA primarily accepts original research articles. The following categories may be considered, subject to editorial approval.

3.1 Original Research Articles

Original research articles present substantial, previously unpublished scholarly investigations based on doctrinal, normative, empirical, comparative, historical, or interdisciplinary legal research.

Research articles must demonstrate a clear research question, appropriate methodology, systematic analysis, and identifiable scholarly contribution.

3.2 Review Articles

Review articles offer critical, systematic, or integrative examinations of established and emerging areas of legal scholarship.

They must extend beyond descriptive summaries by evaluating competing perspectives, identifying gaps in knowledge, and proposing meaningful theoretical or research directions.

3.3 Comparative and Interdisciplinary Legal Studies

These manuscripts examine legal questions across multiple jurisdictions, legal traditions, institutions, or academic disciplines.

Authors must provide explicit comparative criteria and justify the integration of non-legal approaches where applicable.

4. Originality and Contribution to Knowledge

Submitted manuscripts must represent original scholarship that has not previously been published as a substantially identical journal article.

The manuscript should make an identifiable contribution to an existing legal debate, theoretical framework, doctrinal interpretation, or body of empirical knowledge.

Originality may be demonstrated through:

1. A new interpretation or critique of legal doctrines, legislation, or judicial decisions.
2. The development of an innovative theoretical or conceptual framework.
3. New empirical findings concerning legal processes, institutions, or social practices.
4. Original comparative analysis across jurisdictions or legal systems.
5. A critical reassessment of established legal assumptions or methodologies.
6. The identification of previously overlooked legal consequences or regulatory implications.

Authors must clearly explain the research gap and how the manuscript contributes to addressing it.

Novelty should not be claimed merely because a particular legal topic has not previously been examined within a specified locality. Authors should explain the broader conceptual, doctrinal, methodological, or practical significance of the research.

5. Language Requirements

Manuscripts should be written in clear, grammatically accurate, and professionally structured academic English. Both British English and American English are acceptable; however, authors must use one variety consistently throughout the manuscript. Manuscripts written in Bahasa Indonesia may be considered for specifically designated themes or article categories, subject to the journal's editorial policy.

Authors are expected to ensure that their writing demonstrates:

• Accurate legal terminology.
• Clarity of argumentation.
• Logical paragraph development.
• Consistent academic expression.
• Appropriate use of legal concepts.
• Objective and evidence-based analysis.
• Avoidance of unnecessary repetition, colloquial language, and unsupported generalisations.

Professional language editing is recommended when necessary. Language editing does not guarantee acceptance and cannot compensate for fundamental weaknesses in originality, methodology, or legal reasoning. Authors remain responsible for the accuracy of their legal terminology and scholarly arguments after proofreading, editing, or translation.

6. Manuscript Length and Formatting Requirements

6.1 Word Limit

Original research manuscripts should contain approximately 5,000–10,000 words, consistent with JURISTA's established author requirements.

The article must demonstrate sufficient analytical depth and substantive engagement with the relevant scholarly literature.

Authors should avoid unnecessarily lengthy background discussions, excessive repetition of statutory provisions, and extensive descriptive sections that do not contribute directly to the research objectives.

A manuscript exceeding the prescribed limit may be returned for revision unless an exception is approved by the editor.

JURISTA specifies:

• Original legal scholarship of approximately 5,000–10,000 words, with article titles of no more than 14 words.
• An abstract of 150–250 words, in English
• British or American academic English, except for designated Indonesian-language submissions.
• Book Antiqua, 12-point type, A4 paper, and its prescribed margin and spacing requirements.
• Chicago Manual of Style, 17th edition, full-note citations.
• An IMRaD-based article structure and a maximum of five authors.
• Double-blind peer review and open-access publication.

 

6.2 Manuscript Format

Authors must prepare manuscripts using the following specifications:

Component	Requirement
Paper size	A4
Font	Book Antiqua
Main text	12-point
Top margin	3.5 cm
Left margin	3.5 cm
Right margin	3 cm
Bottom margin	3 cm
Main-text spacing	1.15 lines
Abstract spacing	Single
File format	Microsoft Word or compatible editable document
Citation style	Chicago Manual of Style, 17th edition, Notes and Bibliography
Manuscript title	Maximum 14 words
Abstract	150–250 words
Main article length	5,000–10,000 words

Tables and figures must be presented at appropriate locations within the text and numbered consecutively.

The manuscript should use consistent headings, paragraph formatting, punctuation, and spelling conventions.

Authors must avoid unnecessary decorative formatting, coloured text, text boxes, or excessive font variations.

The editable manuscript should not contain unresolved tracked changes or editorial comments at the initial submission stage.

7. Manuscript Title

The article title must accurately and concisely communicate the central research problem, scope, or principal scholarly contribution. The title must contain no more than 14 words. An effective title should:

• Identify the primary legal issue or research subject.
• Reflect the manuscript's substantive or theoretical focus.
• Avoid vague or overly broad terminology.
• Minimise unnecessary abbreviations.
• Avoid unsupported claims of novelty.
• Remain accessible to an international academic audience.

Titles should not exaggerate the significance of the research or promise conclusions that the manuscript does not establish. Geographical references should be included when they are essential to understanding the research context, but authors are encouraged to frame local legal problems within wider scholarly debates.

8. Author Information and Authorship

The existing JURISTA author instructions permit a maximum of five authors per manuscript. Each author must have made a meaningful intellectual contribution to the research. Authorship must not be granted solely on the basis of institutional position, administrative responsibility, financial support, supervision, or professional seniority.

All listed authors must:

1. Have contributed substantially to the research or manuscript.
2. Participate in drafting or critically revising the scholarly content.
3. Approve the final version submitted for publication.
4. Accept responsibility for the integrity and accuracy of their contributions.
5. Agree to the submission and publication of the work.

Authors should provide the following information on a separate title page:

• Full name of each author.
• Institutional affiliation and department.
• City and country of affiliation.
• Institutional email address, where available.
• ORCID iD, where available.
• Identification of the corresponding author.
• Relevant funding and conflict-of-interest declarations.

Corresponding Author

The corresponding author is responsible for communication with the editorial office and must ensure that all co-authors have reviewed and approved the manuscript. The corresponding author must also coordinate revision responses, authorship declarations, publication agreements, and final proof approval.

Author Contributions

JURISTA encourages transparent author-contribution statements using the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT). Relevant roles include conceptualisation, methodology, investigation, formal analysis, data curation, writing of the original draft, review and editing, supervision, and project administration.

Changes in Authorship

Requests to add, remove, or rearrange authors after submission must be justified in writing and supported by the agreement of all affected authors. Such changes require editorial approval and should ordinarily be completed before final acceptance. Disputes concerning authorship may be referred to the authors' institutions where appropriate.

9. Double-Blind Manuscript Preparation

JURISTA operates a double-blind peer-review system. To preserve reviewer independence and author anonymity, authors must prepare two separate documents.

Document A: Title Page

This document contains the complete author information, institutional affiliations, acknowledgements, funding details, and other identifying information required by the journal.

Document B: Anonymised Main Manuscript

This document must not contain identifying information that could unnecessarily reveal the authors' identities. Authors should remove their names, email addresses, institutional details, author biographies, and identifying document metadata from the review version. Self-citations should be included when academically necessary, but the manuscript must not contain language that directly identifies the authors.

Disclosure statements that cannot be anonymised adequately may be submitted separately to the editorial office. The editorial office may return manuscripts that fail to comply with double-blind preparation requirements.

10. Abstract and Keywords

10.1 Abstract

Every submission must include an abstract of approximately 150–250 words, written in academic English and translated into Bahasa Indonesia.

The abstract must provide an accurate and self-contained summary of the research.

It should address the following elements:

Research Context and Problem: Identify the central legal problem, scholarly debate, or research gap.

Research Objective: State the principal objective or question addressed by the study.

Methodology: Briefly identify the legal research approach and relevant analytical methods.

Principal Findings: Summarise the most important substantive arguments or findings.

Original Contribution: Explain the principal theoretical, doctrinal, empirical, or practical significance of the research.

The abstract should not contain extensive background discussion, unexplained abbreviations, unnecessary quotations, or references that are not essential to understanding the research. Assertions made in the abstract must be supported by the manuscript.

10.2 Keywords

As an enhanced international indexing practice, authors are encouraged to provide four to six keywords immediately after each abstract.

Keywords should represent the central legal concepts, research themes, and relevant jurisdictional or methodological elements. Authors should avoid excessive repetition of words already appearing in the title.

11. Organisation and Structure of the Manuscript

JURISTA adopts the scholarly principles of the Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion (IMRaD) model, followed by a conclusion. Because legal scholarship employs diverse methods, authors should adapt the structure to the nature of their research while preserving clear identification of the research problem, methodology, analysis, findings, and contribution. The recommended structure is provided below.

11.1 Introduction

The Introduction should establish the significance, context, and scholarly relevance of the research. It must explain the legal problem being investigated and situate that problem within existing academic debates.

A strong Introduction should include:

1. The broader legal and institutional context of the research.
2. A clear statement of the principal legal problem.
3. Critical engagement with relevant previous scholarship.
4. Identification of an unresolved scholarly question or research gap.
5. An explanation of the research's originality and significance.
6. A clearly formulated research objective or question.
7. A concise statement of the manuscript's principal contribution.

The Introduction should not be dominated by lengthy quotations from statutory instruments or general descriptions of well-established legal principles. Authors are encouraged to demonstrate why the research question matters beyond the immediate geographical or institutional setting.

11.2 Research Methodology

The methodology section must explain how the research was conducted and why the selected approach is appropriate for answering the research question. Authors must identify the methodological tradition used in the research.

1. Doctrinal or Normative Legal Research

For normative legal studies, authors should describe:

• The legal issues examined.
• The primary legal sources used.
• The criteria for selecting laws, cases, treaties, and other legal materials.
• The statutory, conceptual, historical, comparative, or case-based approaches employed.
• The methods of legal interpretation and doctrinal analysis.
• The analytical framework used to develop the research findings.

Legal analysis must demonstrate systematic reasoning rather than merely listing the provisions of relevant legislation.

1. Empirical and Socio-Legal Research

For empirical research, authors should explain:

• Research design and setting.
• Population and sampling procedures.
• Participant or case selection.
• Data collection methods.
• Interview, survey, observation, or documentary procedures.
• Data analysis and validation methods.
• Research limitations.
• Ethical approval and informed consent, where applicable.

Qualitative studies should explain procedures for identifying and interpreting themes, patterns, experiences, or institutional practices. Quantitative studies should identify relevant variables, measurement methods, analytical techniques, and procedures supporting the validity of the findings.

1. Comparative Legal Research

Comparative studies must justify the selection of jurisdictions, legal institutions, cases, or traditions being compared. Authors should establish consistent criteria for comparison and demonstrate awareness of relevant historical, political, cultural, and institutional differences.

1. Historical and Interdisciplinary Approaches

Historical legal research should identify the relevant periods, primary sources, archival materials, and interpretive approaches. Interdisciplinary research must explain how legal analysis is integrated with other disciplines and why the selected methods are appropriate. The methodology section should contain sufficient information for qualified researchers to understand, critically evaluate, and, where applicable, reproduce the analytical process.

11.3 Results and Findings

This section should present the principal findings of the research in a clear, logical, and systematic manner.

The findings must respond directly to the research questions and be grounded in the legal materials, empirical evidence, or theoretical analysis presented.

In doctrinal research, findings may include newly identified legal inconsistencies, interpretive problems, regulatory gaps, or doctrinal developments.

In empirical studies, findings must accurately reflect the collected data and may be supported by tables, figures, quotations, or other appropriate evidence.

Authors should distinguish factual findings from normative arguments and interpretive conclusions.

11.4 Discussion

The Discussion is an essential component of scholarly legal research and should extend beyond the repetition of findings. Authors must critically interpret the research results in relation to existing legal scholarship, competing theories, relevant jurisprudence, and institutional or policy contexts.

The Discussion should:

1. Explain the significance of the principal findings.
2. Relate those findings to the research objectives.
3. Compare the results with existing scholarship.
4. Identify areas of agreement and disagreement with previous studies.
5. Address relevant competing interpretations or counterarguments.
6. Explain the theoretical or doctrinal implications.
7. Examine relevant legal and policy consequences.
8. Acknowledge methodological or evidentiary limitations.
9. Identify areas requiring further investigation.

Authors should avoid unsupported conclusions, selective interpretation of evidence, and normative recommendations that are not logically derived from the analysis.

11.5 Conclusion

The Conclusion must provide a concise and analytically meaningful synthesis of the research. It should directly answer the research questions and explain the manuscript's principal contribution.

The Conclusion should include:

• A synthesis of the main findings.
• The central legal or theoretical implications.
• The contribution to existing scholarship.
• Practical or policy implications, where justified.
• Appropriate recommendations for future research.

The Conclusion must not introduce substantial new evidence or arguments that have not been discussed in the manuscript.

Generic statements that merely repeat the Introduction should be avoided.

12. Legal Authorities and Quality of Legal Reasoning

Authors are responsible for ensuring the accuracy and appropriate interpretation of all legal authorities cited.

These may include:

• Constitutions and constitutional amendments.
• National legislation and subordinate regulations.
• Judicial decisions and constitutional court judgments.
• International treaties and conventions.
• International court and tribunal decisions.
• Customary international law materials.
• Authoritative legal commentaries.
• Official institutional documents.
• Relevant administrative decisions and policy instruments.

Legal Accuracy

Authors must verify the existence, title, date, jurisdiction, authoritative status, and relevant provisions of legal instruments. Judgments must be cited accurately, including the court, case identification, date, and pinpoint paragraph or page where appropriate.

Authors must distinguish binding legal rules from persuasive authority, scholarly interpretation, non-binding declarations, and policy recommendations. The current legal status of relevant instruments should be checked before submission.

Critical Legal Analysis

Authors are expected to evaluate legal authorities critically rather than simply reproduce their content. Legal claims must be supported by relevant authority and logical reasoning, with appropriate recognition of contrary interpretations. For international and comparative legal research, authors should ensure that legal concepts are not transferred between jurisdictions without adequate contextual explanation.

13. Citation and Referencing Requirements

JURISTA requires the Chicago Manual of Style, 17th edition, Notes and Bibliography system, using full footnote citations.

All manuscripts must provide accurate and complete bibliographic information for cited sources.

13.1 General Citation Principles

Authors must:

1. Use numbered footnotes for citations.
2. Provide full bibliographic details at the first citation of a source.
3. Apply shortened citations consistently for subsequent references.
4. Include a complete bibliography at the end of the article.
5. Identify specific pages, paragraphs, or legal provisions when making precise claims.
6. Include a DOI for journal articles wherever available.
7. Verify that all references correspond to authentic, accessible sources.
8. Ensure consistency between footnotes and bibliography entries.

The use of reference-management software such as Zotero, Mendeley, or EndNote is recommended.

13.2 Examples of Chicago-Style Footnotes and Bibliography

1. Book

Full footnote:

Katie Kitamura, A Separation (New York: Riverhead Books, 2017), 25.

Shortened footnote:

Kitamura, A Separation, 91–92.

Bibliography:

Kitamura, Katie. A Separation. New York: Riverhead Books, 2017.

1. Journal Article

Full footnote:

Linda Chelan Li, “Multiple Trajectories and ‘Good Governance’ in Asia: An Introduction,” Journal of Contemporary Asia 44, no. 2 (2014): 187–203, https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2013.870827.

Shortened footnote:

Li, “Multiple Trajectories,” 190.

Bibliography:

Li, Linda Chelan. “Multiple Trajectories and ‘Good Governance’ in Asia: An Introduction.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 44, no. 2 (2014): 187–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/00472336.2013.870827.

1. Chapters in Edited Books

Full footnote:

Mary Rowlandson, “The Narrative of My Captivity,” in The Making of the American Essay, ed. John D’Agata (Minneapolis: Graywolf Press, 2016), 19–20.

Bibliography:

Rowlandson, Mary. “The Narrative of My Captivity.” In The Making of the American Essay, edited by John D’Agata, 19–56. Minneapolis: Graywolf Press, 2016.

1. Legislation, Treaties, and Judicial Decisions

Authors must cite legal instruments using accurate official titles and suitable jurisdiction-specific identifiers.

Legislation should identify the jurisdiction, instrument title, year, and relevant provision.

Treaty citations should identify the official treaty title, adoption or signature date, treaty-series citation where appropriate, and relevant article.

Judicial decisions should identify the parties or case title, court, official case number or reporter citation, date, and pinpoint paragraph or page.

Where recognised jurisdiction-specific legal citation conventions are necessary to identify legal authorities accurately, they may be applied consistently while retaining Chicago-style footnotes and bibliography for scholarly sources.

1. Online Sources

Online sources should identify the responsible author or institution, document title, publication or update date where ascertainable, and a stable URL.

Undated or unreliable online materials should be used cautiously.

13.3 Reference Quality

References should be selected on the basis of relevance, credibility, and scholarly importance rather than arbitrary numerical targets.

Authors are encouraged to engage with recent peer-reviewed international literature while also citing foundational legal authorities and seminal works where necessary.

There is no requirement to cite JURISTA, its editors, or its reviewers unless those publications are genuinely relevant to the manuscript.

Fabricated references, misleading citations, irrelevant citation padding, and citation manipulation are prohibited.

14. Tables, Figures, and Supplementary Materials

Tables and figures should contribute directly to the presentation or interpretation of research findings.

Each table and figure must:

• Be numbered consecutively.
• Have a concise, informative title or caption.
• Be explicitly referred to in the manuscript.
• Contain accurate labels and explanatory notes where necessary.
• Identify its source when reproduced or adapted.
• Be sufficiently clear for publication.

Authors must obtain necessary permissions to reproduce copyrighted figures, photographs, maps, or other third-party materials.

Supplementary materials may include research instruments, additional tables, interview protocols, coding frameworks, methodological documentation, and publicly shareable supporting datasets.

Supplementary materials must comply with applicable confidentiality, copyright, and ethical requirements.

15. Research Ethics and Human Participants

Authors conducting empirical legal research involving human participants must comply with relevant institutional ethical requirements and applicable national laws.

Research involving interviews, surveys, focus groups, observations, court users, legal professionals, or vulnerable populations must be conducted responsibly.

Where ethics approval is required, authors should disclose:

• The name of the approving ethics committee or institution.
• The approval reference number.
• The approval date.
• Confirmation of compliance with the approved research procedures.

Where formal ethical approval is not legally or institutionally required, authors should explain the applicable exemption or basis for non-requirement and describe the protections used.

Informed Consent

Appropriate informed consent must be obtained when required.

Participants should be informed of the research purpose, foreseeable risks, voluntary nature of participation, relevant confidentiality arrangements, and intended use of collected information.

Privacy and Confidentiality

Authors must protect confidential and personally identifiable information.

Special safeguards may be required when research concerns children, displaced populations, Indigenous communities, victims of violence, asylum seekers, or other participants facing heightened risks.

Identifiable quotations, photographs, recordings, or case information must not be published without an appropriate legal and ethical basis.

16. Research Data Availability and Transparency

JURISTA encourages responsible research-data management, methodological transparency, and the availability of supporting materials where legally and ethically permissible.

Data supporting published findings should be retained appropriately and made available when practicable.

Research data may include anonymised interview material, survey datasets, coding schemes, legal-document datasets, archival inventories, or other underlying evidence.

Authors are encouraged to deposit suitable non-confidential datasets in recognised repositories and provide stable identifiers where available.

Data Availability Statement

As an enhanced transparency requirement, authors should provide a statement explaining the availability of the materials supporting their research.

Suggested wording includes:

Publicly available data:

“The data supporting the findings of this study are available in [repository name] at [persistent identifier or URL].”

Restricted data:

“The underlying research data are not publicly available because they contain confidential information concerning research participants. Access may be considered upon reasonable request and subject to applicable ethical and legal restrictions.”

Doctrinal research:

“This study is based on publicly accessible legislation, judicial decisions, international legal instruments, and published scholarly literature. No original empirical dataset was generated.”

Authors must not disclose personal, legally privileged, classified, or otherwise restricted information merely to satisfy a data-sharing expectation.

Editors may request access to supporting materials when necessary for evaluating research integrity, subject to lawful confidentiality safeguards.

17. Funding and Acknowledgements

Authors must disclose all sources of financial support relevant to the research or preparation of the manuscript.

Funding statements should identify the sponsoring institution or organisation and relevant grant number, where applicable.

Authors must also disclose the role of funders in research design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, and publication decisions where such involvement exists.

Where no external financial support was received, authors may state:

“This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.”

Acknowledgements

Individuals and institutions providing valuable assistance without qualifying for authorship may be acknowledged.

Such contributions may include technical assistance, language editing, access to archives, administrative support, and research facilitation.

Permission should be obtained from individuals named in acknowledgements where appropriate.

Funding and acknowledgements that would compromise anonymous peer review should be provided separately during the review stage.

18. Declaration of Competing Interests

Authors must disclose financial and non-financial relationships that could reasonably be perceived as affecting the conduct, interpretation, or publication of the research.

Potential competing interests include:

• Financial relationships with organisations affected by the research.
• Consultancy or professional advisory engagements.
• Employment, institutional, or contractual relationships.
• Political or organisational responsibilities directly relevant to the study.
• Personal or professional relationships that may influence the analysis.
• Other circumstances creating a reasonable perception of bias.

The existence of a competing interest does not automatically disqualify a manuscript, but transparent disclosure is required.

Where no competing interests exist, authors should state:

“The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have influenced the research reported in this article.”

Editors may request additional clarification when necessary.

19. Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence

JURISTA supports responsible, transparent, and appropriately supervised use of generative artificial intelligence and AI-assisted technologies in academic research and manuscript preparation.

AI tools may support language editing, literature organisation, preliminary research assistance, and other permissible activities. However, they must never substitute for the authors' independent intellectual contribution, legal reasoning, critical analysis, or scholarly judgement.

 

19.1 Author Responsibility

Authors remain fully responsible for:

1. The accuracy of all factual and legal claims.
2. The authenticity of cited sources.
3. The validity of research data and analytical conclusions.
4. The originality of the submitted manuscript.
5. Compliance with copyright, confidentiality, and ethical requirements.
6. Verification and correction of AI-generated material.

AI systems must not be listed as authors or co-authors.

19.2 Disclosure Requirement

Authors using generative AI for substantive manuscript preparation must provide a declaration identifying the tool and explaining its role.

A recommended statement is:

“During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI tool] for [specific purpose]. The authors subsequently reviewed, verified, and edited the resulting material and accept full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the published work.”

Routine spelling, punctuation, and basic grammar checks do not ordinarily require disclosure.

AI tools used for research design, coding, data analysis, or other substantive methodological activities must be explained in the methodology section.

19.3 Prohibited Practices

Authors must not use AI technologies to:

• Fabricate legal authorities, judicial decisions, citations, or research references.
• Generate fictitious interviews, observations, or empirical data.
• Misrepresent AI-generated arguments as verified scholarly findings.
• Manipulate evidence or research images.
• Conceal plagiarism or undermine authorship accountability.
• Disclose confidential or sensitive materials without appropriate safeguards.

The editorial office may request additional information regarding AI-assisted manuscript preparation where there are credible concerns about research integrity.

 

20. Plagiarism and Publication Misconduct

JURISTA requires all submitted manuscripts to comply with internationally recognised standards of academic honesty.

The following practices are prohibited:

Plagiarism: Presenting the words, ideas, analysis, or research findings of others without appropriate acknowledgement.

Textual Recycling: Reusing substantial portions of previously published work without adequate disclosure or justification.

Duplicate Publication: Publishing substantially identical research in multiple journals without appropriate disclosure and permission.

Simultaneous Submission: Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal for concurrent consideration.

Fabrication: Inventing research data, legal documents, interviews, findings, or references.

Falsification: Deliberately altering research evidence, analytical results, or supporting records.

Citation Manipulation: Adding irrelevant references to increase citations to particular authors, journals, or publications.

Inappropriate Authorship: Including individuals who do not qualify for authorship or excluding individuals who made substantial qualifying contributions.

Peer-Review Manipulation: Providing false reviewer identities, fabricated contact details, or attempting to interfere improperly with independent evaluation.

Submitted manuscripts may undergo similarity screening and other research-integrity checks.

Similarity reports are interpreted by editors with consideration of legitimate quotations, legal terminology, references, methodology descriptions, and properly attributed material.

No automatic finding of misconduct should be made solely on the basis of a similarity percentage.

Confirmed or substantiated violations may result in manuscript rejection, withdrawal of editorial consideration, notification of relevant institutions, or post-publication corrective action, as appropriate.

21. Prior Publication, Preprints, and Conference Papers

Authors must disclose any previous dissemination of material substantially related to the submitted manuscript.

This includes conference proceedings, working papers, preprints, repository versions, thesis chapters, or previously published articles.

The existence of a preprint or thesis-based version does not necessarily make a manuscript ineligible for consideration.

However, authors must disclose the earlier version and explain the relationship between the previous material and the submitted work.

A manuscript developed from a thesis or conference paper must demonstrate sufficient originality and scholarly development to justify journal publication.

Submissions must comply with any relevant copyright, licensing, and prior-publication restrictions.

The editorial office determines whether the earlier dissemination is compatible with the journal's originality requirements.

22. Copyright and Open-Access Policy

JURISTA operates as an open-access journal and supports the dissemination and responsible reuse of scholarly research.

Authors retain copyright in their work and grant the journal the right of first publication under the journal's applicable publication agreement.

The precise Creative Commons licence governing publication must be identified consistently in the journal's copyright and licensing policies.

Authors must ensure that their manuscripts do not infringe third-party copyright or other intellectual property rights.

Permissions must be secured for copyrighted material where the intended use is not otherwise authorised by law or an applicable licence.

Author self-archiving, institutional repository deposit, and reuse of published articles are governed by the applicable publication licence and journal agreement.

Open access does not exempt authors from their obligations concerning originality, accuracy, confidentiality, attribution, or intellectual property.

 

23. Submission Procedure

All manuscripts must be submitted electronically through JURISTA's official OJS platform:

https://jurista-journal.org/index.php/jurista/about/submissions

Step 1: Registration

The corresponding author must register or sign in to an existing journal account.

Step 2: New Submission

The author initiates a new submission and selects the appropriate journal section.

Step 3: Submission Information

The author completes the required metadata, including the title, abstract, keywords, author information, and other requested declarations.

Step 4: Uploading Files

The author uploads the anonymised manuscript and any required supplementary documents.

Step 5: Supporting Documents

The corresponding author should provide, where applicable:

• A separate title page.
• A cover letter.
• Funding and conflict-of-interest declarations.
• Author-contribution statements.
• Ethical approval information.
• Data availability information.
• Necessary permissions for reproduced material.
• A declaration of substantive AI assistance.
• Any additional documentation requested by the editorial office.

Step 6: Verification and Submission

Before completing submission, the author must verify the accuracy of the metadata and uploaded files.

Submission constitutes confirmation that the manuscript is offered for editorial consideration in accordance with the journal's policies.

24. Cover Letter Requirements

Authors are encouraged to submit a concise cover letter addressed to the Editor-in-Chief.

The cover letter should contain:

1. The complete title of the manuscript.
2. Identification of the corresponding author.
3. A concise explanation of the research problem.
4. The manuscript's principal findings or argument.
5. An explanation of originality and scholarly significance.
6. A statement establishing the manuscript's suitability for JURISTA.
7. Confirmation that the manuscript is not under concurrent consideration elsewhere.
8. Confirmation that all authors have approved the submission.
9. Disclosure of related publications, preprints, or other relevant information.

Suggested Cover Letter

Dear Editor-in-Chief,

We are pleased to submit our manuscript entitled “[Manuscript Title]” for consideration for publication in JURISTA: Jurnal Hukum dan Keadilan.

This manuscript examines [brief description of the principal legal issue] and addresses an important gap in the existing legal literature concerning [research gap].

The study contributes to legal scholarship by [identify the principal theoretical, doctrinal, comparative, or empirical contribution]. We believe that these findings are relevant to JURISTA's readership because they advance scholarly understanding of [relevant legal field or debate].

We confirm that this manuscript represents original work, has not been published as a journal article, and is not currently under consideration by another journal. All authors have reviewed and approved the manuscript and consent to its submission.

All relevant ethical, funding, authorship, competing-interest, and AI-use declarations have been provided.

Thank you for considering our submission.

Sincerely,

[Corresponding Author]

[Institutional Affiliation]

[Email Address]

25. Peer-Review and Editorial Decision Process

All manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment to determine their suitability for external peer review.

Manuscripts satisfying the preliminary requirements are evaluated under JURISTA's double-blind peer-review system.

Research manuscripts should ordinarily be assessed by at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise, in accordance with the journal's formally adopted peer-review policy.

Reviewers assess originality, methodology, legal reasoning, theoretical significance, use of sources, academic presentation, and overall contribution.

Editorial decisions may include:

Accept: The manuscript is suitable for publication without substantive revision.

Minor Revision: Limited amendments are necessary to improve clarity, presentation, references, or particular aspects of the analysis.

Major Revision: Substantial improvements are required to the scholarly argument, methodology, evidence, conceptual framework, or discussion.

Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal's academic or ethical standards or cannot be made suitable through reasonable revision.

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief or an authorised independent handling editor.

Reviewers' recommendations inform but do not determine the final editorial decision.

26. Revised Manuscripts and Response to Reviewers

Authors invited to revise their manuscripts must respond carefully and professionally to the editorial and reviewer comments.

A revised submission should include:

• A revised manuscript.
• A version indicating substantive modifications when requested.
• A point-by-point response document.
• Explanations of changes and corresponding manuscript locations.
• Justification for any reviewer recommendation that has not been adopted.

Recommended Response Format

Reviewer Comment 1:

[Insert the reviewer's comment.]

Author Response:

We thank the reviewer for this constructive observation. We have revised the relevant section to clarify [specific issue] and incorporated additional legal authorities and scholarly discussion where appropriate.

Location of Revision:

Section [number], page [number], paragraphs [numbers].

Authors should address criticism constructively and distinguish between substantive scholarly disagreements and correctable technical matters.

Major revisions may undergo additional review.

A revision invitation does not guarantee eventual acceptance.

27. Acceptance, Proofreading, and Publication

After a manuscript receives final acceptance, the journal may undertake additional editorial and production procedures.

These may include technical editing, reference checking, language correction, metadata verification, layout preparation, and author proof review.

Authors are responsible for examining the proofs carefully and promptly notifying the editorial office of any errors.

Substantial alterations to the manuscript after final acceptance are subject to editorial approval.

Publication takes place following completion of the relevant editorial and production requirements.

Acceptance does not relieve authors of responsibility for the accuracy and integrity of their published work.

28. Corrections, Retractions, and Post-Publication Responsibility

Authors remain accountable for their published research.

If an author discovers a significant factual error, inaccurate legal citation, unreliable research finding, or other material problem after publication, the author must promptly notify the editorial office.

Depending on the circumstances, the journal may publish an appropriate correction, expression of concern, or retraction, following a fair assessment informed by recognised publication-ethics guidance.

Retraction may be appropriate where the findings are unreliable because of serious error or misconduct, or where other substantial publication-integrity problems cannot be adequately corrected.

Post-publication concerns should be handled transparently and proportionately.

29. Appeals and Complaints

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal where they believe that an editorial decision involved a significant factual error, procedural irregularity, unmanaged conflict of interest, or other material concern.

An appeal must identify the manuscript and explain the grounds for reconsideration.

The journal may arrange an independent assessment where appropriate.

Disagreement with reviewer opinions, without a substantive supporting basis, does not in itself justify reversal of an editorial decision.

The editorial office also considers complaints relating to research integrity, editorial conduct, confidentiality, and the fairness of the publication process.

Complaints are examined in accordance with the journal's editorial procedures and relevant ethical guidance.

30. Publication Fees

JURISTA's published fee policy states that the journal does not charge authors a manuscript submission fee, article processing charge, or publication fee.

Publication decisions must be based on academic merit and not on financial considerations.

Any future change in the journal's fee arrangements must be communicated transparently on the official journal website before it applies to authors.

Voluntary financial support, if accepted under a separately established policy, must never be a condition of submission, peer review, acceptance, or publication.

31. Final Submission Checklist

Before submitting a manuscript to JURISTA, authors should confirm the following:

The manuscript falls within JURISTA's aims and scope.

The research presents an original and significant scholarly contribution.

The manuscript has not been submitted simultaneously to another journal.

The title complies with the maximum length of 14 words.

The manuscript complies with the prescribed 5,000–10,000-word range.

English and Indonesian abstracts have been provided.

The main manuscript contains the required scholarly sections.

The research methodology is clearly identified and justified.

All legal instruments, judicial decisions, and references have been verified.

Footnotes and bibliography comply with Chicago 17th edition.

Tables, figures, and supporting materials are appropriately labelled.

The anonymised manuscript contains no unnecessary identifying information.

All authors have approved the manuscript.

Author information and contribution statements have been provided separately.

Funding and competing-interest disclosures are complete.

Relevant ethical approval and consent information has been supplied.

Data availability has been explained where applicable.

Substantive generative AI use has been disclosed where applicable.

Necessary copyright permissions have been obtained.

The cover letter and other supporting files are ready.

The manuscript has been proofread and is ready for independent peer review.

32. Final Editorial Statement

JURISTA: Jurnal Hukum dan Keadilan is committed to promoting original legal scholarship that meets high standards of academic integrity, methodological rigour, theoretical sophistication, and analytical relevance.

Authors are encouraged to submit manuscripts that engage critically with significant legal problems, contribute to contemporary scholarly debates, and advance understanding of law and justice across national, comparative, and international contexts.

Through responsible authorship, transparent research practices, independent peer review, and rigorous editorial oversight, JURISTA seeks to strengthen the reliability, credibility, accessibility, and international relevance of published legal research.