KASBANA: Journal of Islamic Economic Law is a peer-reviewed journal published by Darul Falah School of Sharia Sciences, Bondowoso, East Java. KASBANA publishes research manuscripts focusing on Islamic Economic Law that have not been published elsewhere and are not under review elsewhere.

KASBANA adheres to guidelines based on the Regulation of the Head of LIPI Number 5 Year 2014 concerning the Code of Scientific Publication Ethics, which originates from COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), in addressing all aspects of publication ethics, particularly how to handle cases of research and publication misconduct.

This statement of scientific ethics is a commitment from all parties involved in the publication process of this scientific journal: namely managers, editors, peer reviewers, and authors. The Code of Scientific Publication Ethics upholds three ethical values in publication: (i) Neutrality, ensuring freedom from conflicts of interest in publication management; (ii) Justice, granting authorship rights to those who deserve it; and (iii) Honesty, prohibiting duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism in publication.

Journal Management Code of Ethics:

1. The publisher of KASBANA:Journal of Islamic Economic Law (Darul Falah School of Sharia Sciences, Bondowoso) is responsible for publishing manuscripts that have undergone editing, review, and layout processes according to the norms of scientific journal publication.
2. The publisher of KASBANA:Journal of Islamic Economic Law is responsible for ensuring academic freedom for editors and peer reviewers in carrying out their respective duties.
3. The publisher of KASBANA:Journal of Islamic Economic Law is responsible for maintaining privacy, protecting intellectual property and copyright, and ensuring editorial freedom.

Author Code of Ethics:

1. Reporting Standards:Authors must present accurate reports of original research and objective discussions of its significance. Researchers should present their research findings honestly and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation. Manuscripts must contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to replicate the work. Dishonest or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical and unacceptable behavior. Manuscripts must follow journal submission guidelines.
2. Originality and Plagiarism:Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are original works. Manuscripts should not be submitted simultaneously to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant prior work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors themselves, must be properly acknowledged and referenced. Primary literature should be cited where possible. Directly taken original words from publications by other researchers must appear in quotation marks with appropriate citations.
3. Duplicate or Concurrent Submission:Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is unethical and unacceptable behavior. Duplicate publications arising from a single research project must be clearly identified and referenced as primary publications.
4. Source Acknowledgment:Authors must acknowledge and cite all sources of data used and influential in their work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
5. Authorship of the Manuscript:Authorship of a manuscript should accurately reflect individuals' contributions to its conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. Those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section. Authors also ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and have agreed to its submission for publication.
6. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest:In their manuscript, all authors must disclose any financial or substantive conflicts of interest that may influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.
7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works:If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their submitted manuscript, they must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the manuscript.

Editorial Code of Ethics:

1. Publication Decisions:Based on the review reports from the editorial board, editors may accept, reject, or request modifications to manuscripts. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers should always drive such decisions. Editors may be guided by the policies of the editorial board and constrained by legal requirements such as those currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. Editors may consult with other editors or peer reviewers in making these decisions. Editors are responsible for everything they publish and must have procedures and policies to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of published records.
2. Manuscript Review:Editors must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by an editor for its originality. Editors must organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review process in information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer-reviewed. Editors should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers considered for publication by selecting individuals with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
3. Fairness:Editors must ensure that each submitted manuscript is reviewed based on its intellectual content without regard to gender, race, religion, nationality, etc., of the authors. An essential part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the enforcement of principles of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a strong position to make publication decisions, making it imperative that this process is conducted as fairly as possible.
4. Confidentiality:Editors must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breach of data protection and confidentiality of authors.
5. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest:Editors shall not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research without the written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in manuscript decisions in which they have a conflict of interest.

Reviewer Code of Ethics:

1. Confidentiality:Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and treated as privileged information. They must not be shown or discussed with others unless authorized by the editor.
2. Source Recognition:Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant work that has not been cited by the authors. Reviewers should promptly notify the journal if they discover irregularities, have concerns about the ethics of a manuscript, become aware of substantial similarities between the manuscript and a simultaneous submission to another journal or a published manuscript, or suspect that errors may have occurred during research or manuscript submission. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality and must not personally investigate further unless requested by the journal for more information or advice.
3. Objectivity Standards:Reviewing of submitted manuscripts must be conducted objectively, and reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers must follow the journal's instructions regarding the feedback required from them and, unless there is a good reason not to do so, should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help authors improve their manuscripts. Reviewers should explain how additional investigation essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration would only strengthen or expand the manuscript.
4. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest:Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions. In the case of double-blind review, if they become aware of the authors' identities, they should inform the journal if this poses a potential conflict of interest.
5. Timeliness:Reviewers should respond within a reasonable timeframe. Reviewers should only agree to review manuscripts if they are confident they can return the review within the proposed or mutually agreed timeframe, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. If reviewers feel it is impossible to complete the review within the specified time, they should communicate this promptly to the editor so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.

Reference : https://publicationethics.org