Section A: Publication and Authorship

• All manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Digital Sharia and Contemporary Legal Thought undergo a rigorous peer-review process involving evaluation by at least two independent international or national experts in digital sharia studies, Islamic law, legal theory, comparative law, or related fields addressing contemporary legal issues in digital contexts. Reviewers are appointed by the Managing Editor and the Editor-in-Chief. Authors may recommend potential reviewers for specific article types, subject to editorial discretion.

• Manuscripts are evaluated based on their relevance to digital sharia and contemporary legal thought, originality of contribution, theoretical coherence, methodological rigor, jurisprudential significance, clarity of legal argumentation, and linguistic accuracy.

• Editorial decisions may include acceptance, acceptance with minor revisions, requests for major revisions, or rejection.

• An invitation to revise and resubmit does not constitute a guarantee of eventual acceptance.

• Manuscripts that have been rejected will not be reconsidered.

• Acceptance is contingent upon compliance with applicable legal and ethical standards, including those related to plagiarism, copyright infringement, defamation, and academic misconduct.

• Duplicate publication is strictly prohibited. Manuscripts must not be simultaneously submitted to or published in other journals, including within the Journal of Digital Sharia and Contemporary Legal Thought.

Section B: Authors’ Responsibilities

• Authors must confirm that the submitted manuscript is an original scholarly work and represents their own intellectual contribution.

• Authors must affirm that the manuscript has not been previously published and is not under consideration by another journal.

• Authors are expected to engage constructively with the peer-review process and to respond systematically and substantively to reviewers’ comments.

• Authors bear responsibility for issuing corrections or retractions if significant errors or inaccuracies are identified, particularly those affecting legal reasoning or normative conclusions.

• All listed authors must have made substantial intellectual contributions to the research, including conceptualization, doctrinal analysis, normative interpretation, or socio-legal examination. The specific contributions of each author must be detailed in the “Authors’ Contributions” section.

• Authors must ensure the accuracy, reliability, and ethical integrity of all legal sources, data, case materials, and textual references employed in the manuscript.

• Authors are required to disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest.

• All classical and contemporary sources of Islamic jurisprudence, statutory law, judicial decisions, policy documents, and digital legal materials informing the manuscript must be properly cited.

• Authors must promptly inform the Editors of any material errors identified in their published work.

• Authors should avoid excessive self-citation or citation practices intended to manipulate scholarly metrics or legal authority.

• Withdrawal of manuscripts during the review or post-submission stages is permitted only under exceptional circumstances and may be subject to publisher policies.

Section C: Peer Review and Reviewers’ Responsibilities

• Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents and must not disclose their content or arguments prior to publication.

• Reviews must be conducted objectively, constructively, and respectfully, with particular attention to doctrinal soundness, coherence of legal reasoning, relevance to contemporary digital-legal challenges, and normative consistency with sharia or legal theory frameworks employed by the authors.

• Reviewers are expected to provide clear, well-structured, and evidence-based evaluations, typically ranging between 500 and 1,000 words.

• Reviewers should identify relevant classical fiqh sources, contemporary legal scholarship, and digital-law literature that has not been cited by the authors.

• Reviewers must notify the Editor-in-Chief of any substantial overlap between the manuscript under review and previously published or submitted works.

• Reviewers must decline review assignments where conflicts of interest exist, including collaborative, institutional, or supervisory relationships with the authors.

Section D: Editorial Responsibilities

• The Editors, including the Managing Editor and the Editor-in-Chief, have full authority over editorial decisions and are responsible for ensuring scholarly rigor and ethical integrity.

• The Editors are accountable for maintaining the academic relevance and intellectual orientation of the journal within the field of digital sharia and contemporary legal thought.

• Editorial decisions are based solely on scholarly merit, originality, clarity of legal analysis, and alignment with the journal’s scope.

• The Editors shall issue corrections, clarifications, or retractions as required to uphold academic and legal integrity.

• The Editors must ensure transparent disclosure of all sources of research funding, particularly where studies involve legal institutions, regulatory bodies, or digital platforms.

• Reviewer anonymity shall be protected in accordance with the journal’s peer-review model.

• The Editors must ensure that all published research complies with internationally recognized ethical standards and relevant legal norms.

• Allegations of misconduct must be supported by credible evidence and handled in accordance with COPE procedures.

• The Editors must prevent conflicts of interest involving authors, reviewers, editors, or editorial board members.

Section E: Publishing Ethics Issues

• All editors, reviewers, and authors are required to comply with the principles and best practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

• The corresponding author, acting on behalf of all co-authors, may request withdrawal of a manuscript only before the peer-review process begins or during the revision stage, subject to editorial approval.

• Substantive changes to an accepted manuscript are permitted only with compelling scholarly or legal justification and editorial consent.

• All parties involved in the publication process must act promptly, transparently, and responsibly in issuing corrections or clarifications.

• Cases of plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or other serious ethical or legal violations will be investigated and addressed in accordance with COPE guidelines.

References

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (n.d.). Core practices. https://publicationethics.org/core-practices

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (n.d.). Guidelines on good publication practice. https://publicationethics.org/guidance/guidelines