ISSN 2581-5369
HeinOnline · Manupatra · Google Scholar Indexed · 1000+ libraries
Journal Policy — ISSN 2581-5369
Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement
The International Journal of Law Management & Humanities [ISSN 2581-5369] is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics across every stage of the publication process. All parties involved in the act of publishing — the editorial board, peer reviewers, and authors — are expected to observe the standards of ethical behaviour set out in this statement. IJLMH follows all Core Practices set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Ethics Framework — At a Glance
StandardCOPE Core Practices
Peer ReviewDouble-Blind
Plagiarism ScreeningTurnitin / Drillbit
Misconduct ReportingNo time limit
Post-publication reviewActive
Contact for concernssubmission@ijlmh.com
Core Principles
The values that govern publication at IJLMH
Integrity
All published research must represent an honest account of the work performed. Fabrication, falsification, and selective reporting of data constitute research misconduct and are grounds for rejection or retraction.
Confidentiality
Manuscripts under review are confidential. Editors, reviewers, and all editorial staff must not disclose the contents of any submission or use unpublished material for their own research or advantage.
Fairness
Manuscripts are evaluated solely on academic merit and relevance to the journal's scope — without regard to the author's race, gender, nationality, religion, institutional affiliation, or political views.
Transparency
The journal's policies — including peer review process, authorship criteria, conflicts of interest requirements, and correction and retraction procedures — are publicly disclosed and consistently applied.
Accountability
All parties — editors, reviewers, and authors — are accountable for their conduct. Reported misconduct is investigated without time limitation, and findings are acted upon irrespective of when the issue arose.
Independence
Editorial decisions are made independently of commercial considerations. No advertiser, funder, or third party has any influence over acceptance decisions, which rest solely with the Editor-in-Chief.
COPE Compliance
IJLMH follows all Core Practices set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics.
The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is the internationally recognised body that defines best practice in the ethics of scholarly publishing. IJLMH endorses and follows the COPE Core Practices in their entirety. Where this page does not address a specific situation, editors and authors should consult the COPE Core Practices documentation and the COPE flowcharts directly. The COPE flowcharts provide guidance on specific scenarios including allegations of plagiarism, fabricated data, undisclosed conflicts of interest, authorship disputes, and reviewer misconduct.
Allegations of Misconduct
Investigated using COPE flowcharts — no time limitation applies to reporting.
Authorship Disputes
Resolved in accordance with COPE authorship guidelines and the journal's authorship criteria.
Data Integrity
Concerns about data fabrication or manipulation handled per COPE guidance on data and reproducibility.
Corrections & Retractions
Published in accordance with COPE guidelines on corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions.
Duties & Responsibilities
Ethical obligations by role
01
Fair play and editorial independence
Manuscripts are evaluated solely on academic merit and relevance to the journal's scope, irrespective of the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation. The Editor-in-Chief's decision is final and binding. Editorial decisions are made independently of any commercial or third-party interest.
02
Confidentiality
Editors must not disclose or disseminate any information about a submitted manuscript — including its contents, review status, or the identity of its authors — to anyone other than the corresponding author, assigned reviewers, or other members of the editorial team working directly on the manuscript. This obligation continues after rejection or withdrawal.
03
Conflicts of interest
Editors must disclose any conflict of interest — personal, professional, or research-related — with a manuscript assigned to them, and must recuse themselves from its handling. In such cases, the manuscript is transferred to another editor for independent assessment. Editors must not use unpublished manuscript content for their own research, financial gain, or professional advantage.
04
Publication decisions
All manuscripts that pass initial screening and plagiarism checks are sent to at least two independent peer reviewers who are experts in the relevant subject area. The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision based on the reviewers' reports and an independent assessment of the manuscript's importance to researchers and readers, and in compliance with applicable law regarding libel, copyright, and plagiarism.
05
Investigation of misconduct
Editors are obligated to take appropriate action — in accordance with COPE guidelines — when ethical concerns arise regarding any submitted or published manuscript. No time limit applies to the reporting of unethical conduct. The Editor-in-Chief will convene a committee of at least two editorial board members to investigate any allegation, whether raised before or after publication. Where an allegation is substantiated, a correction, retraction, or expression of concern will be published.
06
Use of unpublished material
Editors must not use content, data, ideas, or information from a manuscript under review for their own research, publications, or any other purpose without the prior written consent of the submitting author.
01
Contribution to editorial decisions
The peer reviewer's assessment directly assists the Editor-in-Chief in making a well-informed publication decision, and provides feedback to authors that supports the improvement of the submitted work. Reviewers are expected to approach manuscripts with rigour and constructive intent.
02
Promptness and qualification
A reviewer who does not have the subject-matter expertise required for a manuscript, or who cannot complete the review within a reasonable timeframe, must notify the editors immediately and decline the invitation. This allows alternative reviewers to be assigned promptly and ensures the review process is not delayed.
03
Confidentiality
All manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated accordingly. Reviewers must not show, share, or discuss the manuscript with any third party without express authorisation from the Editor-in-Chief. This applies equally to reviewers who decline a review invitation — they are still bound by the confidentiality obligation in respect of any information already received.
04
Objectivity
Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should provide clear, substantiated, and constructive feedback that will assist the editors and, where relevant, help the author improve the manuscript. Opinions must be supported by appropriate argument and reference to the literature.
05
Acknowledgement of sources
Reviewers must identify any relevant published works that have not been cited by the authors, and should draw the editors' attention to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and any other published or unpublished work of which they have personal knowledge.
06
Conflicts of interest
Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest — personal, professional, or financial — with the manuscript assigned to them, and must decline the review. Reviewers must not use information from an unpublished manuscript for their own research purposes or for any other personal gain.
01
Reporting standards
Authors must present an honest and accurate account of the research performed. Results, discussions, and conclusions must be stated clearly with proper evidence. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and will result in rejection or retraction. All results based on the methods employed must be included — selective omission of unfavourable data is not acceptable.
02
Originality and plagiarism
Authors must ensure that the manuscript submitted is entirely their own original work and that it does not contain plagiarised content in any form — including uncited text reproduction, improper paraphrasing, or self-plagiarism. All manuscripts are screened using Turnitin and/or Drillbit. At submission, authors declare that the manuscript is free from plagiarism. Citations and referencing do not automatically eliminate plagiarism — proper original expression is required. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is not acceptable.
03
Multiple, redundant or concurrent submission
Submitting the same manuscript — or substantially the same research — to more than one journal simultaneously is unethical and unacceptable. A manuscript under review at IJLMH must not be submitted elsewhere while the review is pending. Exceptions for multilingual publication may be considered only with prior written approval from the Editorial Board.
04
Authorship
Only individuals who have made a genuine substantive intellectual contribution to the manuscript should be named as authors. Each listed author must have: (i) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis and interpretation of the study; (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) seen and approved the final version and agreed to its submission. Acknowledgements may be included for contributors who do not meet the authorship threshold — but only with their written permission. Gift authorship and ghost authorship are unacceptable.
05
Disclosure of conflicts of interest and funding
Authors must disclose any financial or personal conflict of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of the research. All sources of financial support — including grant numbers or other reference numbers — must be disclosed in the manuscript.
06
Participation in peer review
Authors must participate constructively in the peer review process. Where changes are requested, authors must respond point by point, in a timely manner, and re-submit the revised manuscript within the timeframe communicated by the editorial team.
07
Errors in published work
If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published manuscript, they must immediately notify the editors and cooperate in the publication of a correction or retraction as appropriate. Where the journal independently identifies a significant error, it is the author's responsibility to provide a corrected version promptly.
01
Support for editorial independence
VidhiAagaz, as publisher of IJLMH, fully supports the editorial independence of the journal. Publication decisions are made solely by the editorial team and are not subject to commercial or other external influence. The publisher does not interfere with the content of individual manuscripts or with the outcome of the peer review process.
02
Preservation and accessibility
The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of all published research. Published content is indexed in multiple databases — including HeinOnline and Google Scholar — and held in 1000+ university libraries, ensuring long-term discoverability and accessibility to the global research community.
03
Transparent policies
All journal policies — including the review process, authorship criteria, publication ethics, open access terms, and processing charges — are published on the journal website and are applied consistently to all submissions. The publisher ensures these policies remain current, accurate, and accessible to all prospective authors, reviewers, and readers.
04
Ethical marketing
Any communication or marketing activities undertaken on behalf of IJLMH — including calls for papers — are accurate, targeted, and not misleading. The journal does not engage in the unsolicited mass distribution of communications to authors who have not expressed an interest in submitting to the journal.
Publication Misconduct
Forms of misconduct — and how they are handled
The following constitute publication misconduct under IJLMH's ethics policy and COPE guidelines. All allegations are investigated regardless of when they are reported — there is no time limitation. Confirmed misconduct will result in the actions described in the table below.
Critical
Plagiarism
Reproduction of another's text, ideas, or data without attribution — including improper paraphrasing, copying without citation, and contract writing. All forms of plagiarism are unacceptable. If discovered after publication, the manuscript will be retracted.
Critical
Data Fabrication & Falsification
Invention or manipulation of research data, results, or findings. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are grounds for immediate rejection or, if discovered post-publication, retraction and notification of the author's institution.
Serious
Ghost & Gift Authorship
Listing individuals who did not make a genuine intellectual contribution to the manuscript (gift authorship), or omitting individuals who did (ghost authorship). All listed authors must satisfy IJLMH's three-part authorship criteria.
Serious
Duplicate & Concurrent Submission
Submitting the same manuscript — or substantially the same research — simultaneously to more than one journal, or submitting previously published work as original. Manuscripts found to be under parallel review elsewhere will be immediately rejected.
Serious
Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest
Failure by authors, reviewers, or editors to disclose financial, personal, or professional relationships that could influence the objectivity of the published work or the review decision.
Serious
Reviewer Misconduct
Using content from a manuscript under review for the reviewer's own research or advantage; disclosing confidential information from a manuscript under review; providing a dishonest or malicious review.
Serious
Manipulation of Peer Review
Attempts by authors to interfere with the peer review process — including suggesting reviewers who have a conflict of interest, or contacting reviewers outside the editorial process.
Moderate
Failure to Correct Errors
Failure by authors to promptly notify the journal of significant errors discovered in published work, or failure to cooperate with the journal's correction or retraction process.
Corrections & Retractions
Post-publication actions
IJLMH is committed to maintaining the integrity of the published scholarly record. Where errors, misconduct, or other concerns are identified in published manuscripts — whether reported by the authors, reviewers, readers, or discovered by the editorial team — the journal will take appropriate action in accordance with COPE guidelines.
| Action | When Used | Process |
|---|---|---|
| Correction / Erratum | A small, genuine error in the published manuscript — such as a factual inaccuracy, calculation error, or misidentified figure — that does not affect the conclusions or the integrity of the work. | A correction notice is published, linked to the original article. The original article is updated to note the correction. |
| Expression of Concern | The editorial team has received credible evidence of potential misconduct or a significant error, but investigation is ongoing or inconclusive. The integrity of the published work is in question but not yet confirmed. | An expression of concern is published while the investigation proceeds, in accordance with COPE guidelines. |
| Retraction | The findings are unreliable due to data fabrication, falsification, or a major, uncorrectable error; plagiarism is confirmed; the work has been published elsewhere without disclosure; the research was conducted unethically; or authorship is disputed. | A retraction notice is published, linked to the original article. The original article is clearly marked as retracted. The author's institution may be notified. The author is given the opportunity to respond before the retraction notice is finalised. |
| Removal | The content constitutes a serious legal violation (e.g. defamation, privacy breach, or court-ordered removal) or poses a severe health or safety risk — irrespective of its scientific accuracy. | Content is removed from the website. A notice explaining why the content has been removed replaces it. The article metadata (title, authors, DOI) is retained for the integrity of the bibliographic record. |
Correction and retraction notices are permanently linked to the original article on the IJLMH website and through its DOI record, so that anyone accessing the original article via its DOI or through any indexed database is immediately directed to the relevant notice. IJLMH follows the COPE Core Practices and relevant COPE flowcharts when handling all post-publication concerns.
Reporting Concerns
How to report an ethics concern
Any person — author, reviewer, reader, institution, or third party — who has reason to believe that ethical misconduct has occurred in connection with a manuscript submitted to or published in IJLMH is encouraged to report their concern to the editorial team.
There is no time limitation on reporting. Concerns may be raised in respect of manuscripts at any stage — submitted, under review, accepted, or published — and regardless of when the conduct occurred.
Reports should be directed to the Editor-in-Chief at submission@ijlmh.com. The report should include the Manuscript ID (if known), the nature of the concern, and any supporting evidence. All reports are treated in confidence and investigated in accordance with COPE guidelines.
Where the concern involves the Editor-in-Chief directly, the report should be addressed to the Publisher at VidhiAagaz: submission@ijlmh.com.