Focus and Scope

Focus:  Jurnal Restorative Justice menjadi wadah penyebarluasan bagi mahasiswa, akademisi, peneliti dan praktisi dalam menyebarluaskan hasil penelitian.

Scope: Jurnal Restorative Justice menyangkut kajian hukum adat, pidana, perdata dan tata negara.

Peer Review Process

Jurnal Restorative Justice (JRJ) published the only paper strictly following JRJ guidelines and template for preparation manuscript. All submitted manuscripts are going through a double-blind peer review process. Those papers are read by editorial members (upon field of specialization) and will be screened by Managing Editor to meet necessary criteria of JRJ publication. Manuscripts will be sent to two reviewers based on their historical experience in reviewing manuscript or based on their field of specialisation. JRJ has reviewing forms in order to keep same items reviewed by two reviewers. Then editorial board make a decision upon the reviewers comments or advice. Reviewers give their assessment on originality, clarity of presentation, contribution to the field/science, JRJ has four kind of decisions:

Accepted, as it is
Accepted by Minor Revisions (let authors revised with stipulated time)
Accepted by Major Revisions (let authors revised with stipulated time)
Rejected (generally, on grounds of outside of scope and aim, major technical description problems, lack of clarity of presentation)

Publication Frequency

Mei dan November

Open Access Policy

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

Publication Ethics

Jurnal Restorative Justice is a peer-reviewed journal published by Faculty of Law Musamus University. This journal is available in print and online and highly respects the publication ethic and avoids any type of plagiarism. This statement explains the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor in chief, the editorial board, the peer-reviewers­­­­­ and the publisher (Faculty of Law Musamus University). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication. The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal of JRJ is an essential building block 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 agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.

Faculty of Law Musamus University as publisher of JRJ takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and we recognize our ethical behavior and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Faculty of Law Musamus University and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Publication decisions. The editor of the Musamus Law Review is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the 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 as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may co nfer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play. The editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

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, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

 

Duties of Reviewers

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 paper.

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 excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality. Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.