Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Focus

Trunojoyo Law Review focuses on Empirical Legal Research and Local Wisdom, specifically in Madura.

Scope

Trunojoyo Law Review specializes in empirical legal research and local wisdom, specifically in Madura, and intends to publish research results and current issues on the subject. The journal particularly welcomes contributions from academics and researchers from disciplines related to the topic: Constitutional Law, Village Development Law, Law and Human Rights, Environmental Law, Marine Law, Criminal Law, Civil and Business Law, Customary Law and Local Wisdom, Law and Cultural Development, Islamic Law, and related fields.

 

Section Policies

Article

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

In the reviewing process, there are at least two reviewers for each manuscript in the related topic. In addition, the author(s) can also propose the candidate of reviewers. Judgment from the first reviewer will be the main priority for the editor to make a decision if there are only two reviewers. In the case of three reviewers, the decision will be made from at least two reviewers. Three weeks will be needed for a reviewer to complete one round reviewing process.

Generally, the candidate of reviewers will be chosen based on their reputation in the international publication number and quality. Next step, The Editor sends the invitation letter for each candidate of the reviewer. After the candidate of the reviewer informed their availabilities for the reviewing process, the Editor creates an account for each reviewer and then send the manuscript by OJS.

All reviewing process are in double-blind review and managed by editor in the OJS.

Articles are evaluated on the criteria outlined below.

  • The appropriateness or fit for the mission of the Social Science, Economic Science, and Humanities
  • The significance in contributing new knowledge (advancing a field of study, or providing best practices or lessons-learned);
  • The rigor and appropriateness of the scholarship; and
  • The readability and flow of the information and ideas presented.

Additional criteria based on the following manuscript types: as a research article, as a reflective essay; as a project with promise article; as a dissertation abstract; or as a book review.

 

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.

This journal is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to full-text articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or author. This is in accordance with 

Hasil gambar untuk Budapest Open Access Initiative  

Budapest Open Access Initiative

 An old tradition and a new technology have converged to make possible an unprecedented public good. The old tradition is the willingness of scientists and scholars to publish the fruits of their research in scholarly journals without payment, for the sake of inquiry and knowledge. The new technology is the internet. The public good they make possible is the world-wide electronic distribution of the peer-reviewed journal literature and completely free and unrestricted access to it by all scientists, scholars, teachers, students, and other curious minds. Removing access barriers to this literature will accelerate research, enrich education, share the learning of the rich with the poor and the poor with the rich, make this literature as useful as it can be, and lay the foundation for uniting humanity in a common intellectual conversation and quest for knowledge.

For various reasons, this kind of free and unrestricted online availability, which we will call open access, has so far been limited to small portions of the journal literature. But even in these limited collections, many different initiatives have shown that open access is economically feasible, that it gives readers extraordinary power to find and make use of relevant literature, and that it gives authors and their works vast and measurable new visibility, readership, and impact. To secure these benefits for all, we call on all interested institutions and individuals to help open up access to the rest of this literature and remove the barriers, especially the price barriers, that stand in the way. The more who join the effort to advance this cause, the sooner we will all enjoy the benefits of open access.

The literature that should be freely accessible online is that which scholars give to the world without expectation of payment. Primarily, this category encompasses their peer-reviewed journal articles, but it also includes any unreviewed preprints that they might wish to put online for comment or to alert colleagues to important research findings. There are many degrees and kinds of wider and easier access to this literature. By "open access" to this literature, we mean its free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself. The only constraint on reproduction and distribution, and the only role for copyright in this domain, should be to give authors control over the integrity of their work and the right to be properly acknowledged and cited.

While the peer-reviewed journal literature should be accessible online without cost to readers, it is not costless to produce. However, experiments show that the overall costs of providing open access to this literature are far lower than the costs of traditional forms of dissemination. With such an opportunity to save money and expand the scope of dissemination at the same time, there is today a strong incentive for professional associations, universities, libraries, foundations, and others to embrace open access as a means of advancing their missions. Achieving open access will require new cost recovery models and financing mechanisms, but the significantly lower overall cost of dissemination is a reason to be confident that the goal is attainable and not merely preferable or utopian.

To achieve open access to scholarly journal literature, we recommend two complementary strategies. 

I.  Self-Archiving: First, scholars need the tools and assistance to deposit their refereed journal articles in open electronic archives, a practice commonly called, self-archiving. When these archives conform to standards created by the Open Archives Initiative, then search engines and other tools can treat the separate archives as one. Users then need not know which archives exist or where they are located in order to find and make use of their contents.

II. Open-access Journals: Second, scholars need the means to launch a new generation of journals committed to open access, and to help existing journals that elect to make the transition to open access. Because journal articles should be disseminated as widely as possible, these new journals will no longer invoke copyright to restrict access to and use of the material they publish. Instead they will use copyright and other tools to ensure permanent open access to all the articles they publish. Because price is a barrier to access, these new journals will not charge subscription or access fees, and will turn to other methods for covering their expenses. There are many alternative sources of funds for this purpose, including the foundations and governments that fund research, the universities and laboratories that employ researchers, endowments set up by discipline or institution, friends of the cause of open access, profits from the sale of add-ons to the basic texts, funds freed up by the demise or cancellation of journals charging traditional subscription or access fees, or even contributions from the researchers themselves. There is no need to favor one of these solutions over the others for all disciplines or nations, and no need to stop looking for other, creative alternatives.


Open access to peer-reviewed journal literature is the goal. Self-archiving (I.) and a new generation of open-access journals (II.) are the ways to attain this goal. They are not only direct and effective means to this end, but they are also within the reach of scholars themselves, immediately, and need not wait on changes brought about by markets or legislation. While we endorse the two strategies just outlined, we also encourage experimentation with further ways to make the transition from the present methods of dissemination to open access. Flexibility, experimentation, and adaptation to local circumstances are the best ways to assure that progress in diverse settings will be rapid, secure, and long-lived.

The Open Society Institute, the foundation network founded by philanthropist George Soros, is committed to providing initial help and funding to realize this goal. It will use its resources and influence to extend and promote institutional self-archiving, to launch new open-access journals, and to help an open-access journal system become economically self-sustaining. While the Open Society Institute's commitment and resources are substantial, this initiative is very much in need of other organizations to lend their effort and resources.

We invite governments, universities, libraries, journal editors, publishers, foundations, learned societies, professional associations, and individual scholars who share our vision to join us in the task of removing the barriers to open access and building a future in which research and education in every part of the world are that much more free to flourish.

February 14, 2002
Budapest, Hungary

Leslie Chan: Bioline International
Darius Cuplinskas: Director, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Michael Eisen: Public Library of Science
Fred Friend: Director of Scholarly Communication, University College London
Yana Genova: Next Page Foundation
Jean-Claude Guédon: University of Montreal
Melissa Hagemann: Program Officer, Information Program, Open Society Institute
Stevan Harnad: Professor of Cognitive Science, University of Southampton, Universite du Quebec a Montreal
Rick Johnson: Director, Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition (SPARC)
Rima Kupryte: Open Society Institute
Manfredi La Manna: Electronic Society for Social Scientists 
István Rév: Open Society Institute, Open Society Archives
Monika Segbert: eIFL Project consultant 
Sidnei de Souza: Informatics Director at CRIA, Bioline International
Peter Suber: Professor of Philosophy, Earlham College & The Free Online Scholarship Newsletter
Jan Velterop: Publisher, BioMed Central

 

Archiving

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

 

License

 Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

 

Article Processing Charges (APCs)

This journal charges the following author fees.

Article Submission FREE: 0.00 (USD)

Fast-Track Review FREE: 0.00 (USD)

Article Publication FREE: 0.00 (USD)

 

Plagiarism Policy

Before going to the review process, all manuscripts will be checked that they are free from plagiarism practice using "Turnitin" software. If there an indication of plagiarism, the manuscript will instantly be rejected.

PLAGIARISM INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO:

  1. refer and/or quoting terms, words and/or sentences, data and/or information from a source without citing sources in the record citation and/or without stating the source adequately;
  2. refer and/or quoting random terms, words and/or sentences, data and/or information from a source without citing a source in the record citation and/or without stating the source adequately;
  3. using a source of ideas, opinions, views, or theory without stating the source adequately;
  4. formulate the words and/or sentences themselves from the source of words and/or phrases, ideas, opinions, views, or theory without stating the source adequately;
  5. submit a scientific paper produced and/or published by others as a source of scientific work without express adequately.

PREVENTION

In every article submitted to Trunojoyo Law Review must be attached to a statement signed by the author that:

  1. The article is free of plagiarism;
  2. if at a later proved there is plagiarism in the article, the author is willing to accept the sanctions in accordance with the legislation.

SANCTIONS

  1. reprimand;
  2. letter of warning;
  3. revocation of the article;
  4. cancellation of publication.

 

Ethics Statement

Trunojoyo Law Review is a peer-reviewed journal. This journal follows guidelines from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)  facing all aspects of publication ethics and, in particular, how to handle cases of research and publication misconduct. This statement clarifies 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-reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher (Faculty of Law, University of Trunojoyo Madura). Trunojoyo Law Review and University of Trunojoyo Journals are dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters, errors, and retractions. The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the important responsibilities of the editorial board. Any kind of unethical behavior is not acceptable, and the journals do not tolerate plagiarism in any form.

Trunojoyo Law Review adapts COPE to meet a high-quality standard of ethics for publishers, editors, authors, and reviewers. As an essential issue, publication ethics needs to be explained clearly to improve the quality of the research worldwide. In this part, we explain the standard for editors, authors, and reviewers. Publisher doesn’t have the right to interfere with the integrity of the contents and only support to publish in a timely manner.

For Editors

  1. Based on the review report of the editorial review board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript.
  2. Editors should be responsible for every article published in Trunojoyo Law Review
  3. The editors may communicate with other editors or reviewers in making the final decision.
  4. An editor has to evaluate the manuscript objectively for publication, judging each on its quality without looking to nationality, ethnicity, political beliefs, race, religion, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the authors. He/she should decline his/her assignment when there is a potential for conflict of interest.
  5. Editors need to ensure the document sent to the reviewer does not contain the information of the author, vice versa.
  6. Editors’ decisions should be informed to authors accompanied by reviewers’ comments unless they contain offensive or libelous remarks.
  7. Editors should respect requests from authors that an individual should not review the submission if these are well-reasoned and practicable.
  8. Editors and all staff should guarantee the confidentiality of the submitted manuscript.
  9. Editors will be guided by COPE flowcharts if there is a suspected misconduct or disputed authorship.

For Reviewers

Reviewers need to comment on ethical questions and possible research and publication misconduct.

  1. Reviewers will do the work in a timely manner and should notify the editor if they can not complete the work.
  2. Reviewers need to keep the confidentiality of the manuscript.
  3. Reviewers should not accept to review the manuscripts in which there is a potential conflict of interest between them and any of the authors.

For Authors

  1. Author(s) affirm that the material has not been previously published and that they have not trans­ferred elsewhere any rights to the article.
  2. Author(s) should ensure the originality of the work and they have properly cited others’ work in accordance with the format of the references.
  3. Author(s) should not engage in plagiarism nor self-plagiarism.
  4. Author(s) should ensure that they follow the authorship criteria that are taken from Trunojoyo Law Review that is explained in instruction for the author
  5. Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal.
  6. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contributions must be listed as co-authors. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
  7. The author(s) haven’t suggested any personal information that may make the identity of the patient recognizable in any form of description part, photograph or pedigree.
  8. Author(s) should give the editor the data and details of the work if there are suspicions of data falsification or fabrication.
  9. If at any point in time, the author(s) discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a submitted manuscript, then the error or inaccuracy must be reported to the editor.
  10. Authors of the journal should clarify everything that may cause a conflict of interests such as work, research expenses, consul­tant expenses, and intellectual property on the document of Trunojoyo Law Review form disclosure.

Disclaimer

The Editors of Trunojoyo Law Review make every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in its publications. However, the  Editors of  Trunojoyo Law Review make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness or suitability for any purpose of the Content and disclaim all such representations and warranties whether express or implied to the maximum extent permitted by law. Any views expressed in this publication are the views of the authors and are not necessarily the views of the Editors of Trunojoyo Law Review.

 

Retraction

The papers published in the Trunojoyo Law Review will be considered to retract in the publication if :

  1. They have clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g. data fabrication) or honest error (e.g. miscalculation or experimental error) 
  2. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper crossreferencing, permission justification (i.e. cases of redundant publication) 
  3. It constitutes plagiarism 
  4. It reports unethical research 

The mechanism of retraction follows the Retraction Guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) which can be accessed at https://publicationethics.org/files/retraction%20guidelines.pdf