Journal of Law

Publication Ethics

For Author:

Submission Standards

Authors should present an account of their submitted work specifying its approach, significance, method, results, and discussion. The report should be detailed, well-referenced, accurate, and objective. Expressed opinions of authors or editorial views should be clear and lucid. Falsified statements are regarded as unethical and unacceptable.

Data Access

Authors must provide access to their raw data via data repositories, provided that confidentiality is protected, and intellectual property is safeguarded upon release. Please include a link to the data location inside the manuscript.


Violation of scientific research ethics misconduct includes fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in performing or reporting research results. The manuscript must be original and free of plagiarism. Correct citation and use of quote marks to identify content derived from other sources must be appropriately followed.  If there is any overlap in the manuscript with any published or submitted content, the author should acknowledge and cite it. Undocumented use of the work, ideas, or words of others, or ascribing them to oneself is regarded as unethical and unacceptable. The journal uses “authenticate” software to check for instances of similar text in submitted manuscripts.

Multiple, Duplicate or Concurrent Submission/Publication

Authors should declare that their work has not been previously published in any form, nor simultaneously submitted elsewhere and that the data, in full or part, have not been previously used with other published works. Duplicate submission is regarded as unacceptable and unethical behavior. However, in accordance with the Academic Publishing Council’s bylaws, permissions to re-publish the research elsewhere can be granted, in writing, by the editor-in-chief only after the passage of at least three whole years following its date of publication in the Arab Journal of Administrative Sciences (AJAS), provided the primary publication is cited in the second publication.

Authorship of the Manuscript

The list of authors should only contain those who have contributed significantly to the formation of the manuscript. They are the ones who are held responsible for the work’s content, data acquisition, investigation, analysis, drafting, and revising the manuscript. Others who offered technical or general assistance or support, and who do not meet the criteria for authorship, will be only included in the acknowledgment section after their written consent is obtained. Names of co-authors (according to the above definition) must be provided in full. All co/authors must give their approval to the manuscript's final version and agreement to its publication.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors must-as quickly as possible-disclose any conflicts of interest that may be seen to have affected their interpretation of the submitted manuscript in any way or form. All sources of financial funding should be clearly identified in the manuscript including research grants if any. A detailed description of or reference to the grant’s type and number must also be provided. 

Acknowledgment of Sources

Authors must acknowledge their use of the work of others, and appropriately reference all influences that have been seminal to their research. Authors should not use any information that is disclosed confidentially or obtained privately from a third party without their written permission.

Hazards of Experimenting with Human Participants

If the work involves human participation or animals, the researchers must confirm that all procedures follow relevant laws and institutional directives approved by an institutional review board. They should also provide ample information on the possible impact of the adopted procedures on the participants and indicate that they have obtained the approval of all those involved in the experiments/study as well.

Compliance with the Peer Review

If a preliminary decision is made, and a specific amendment is requested, authors must respond to the reviewers' comments fully and implement all suggestions point by point before resubmitting the revised version to the AJAS within the prescribed time.

Errors in Published Works

Should the author discover any significant error or inaccuracy in the published work, it is their duty to notify the editorial board promptly and cooperate with them to either correct or withdraw the manuscript. If the editorial board is notified of any significant errors or inaccuracies, the author must correct the error, withdraw the research containing the error, or provide proof of its correctness. Any published data the journal found inaccurate or misleading, will be corrected promptly. The authors are expected to cooperate with the editors to provide such corrections. If an item proved to pose a violation of the publishing policies, it will be retracted, and attributes legal consequences to its author. If misconduct is suspected, the journal will act in accordance with the published relevant policies outlined in the Editorial Policies documents.

For Editorial Board:

Editorial Independence

The editorial board should judge received manuscripts based only on their academic merit. Specifically, on their work’s originality, importance, clarity, validity, and relevance to the Journal of the AJAS scope of interest without regard to the author’s nationality, affiliation, ethnic origin or race, gender, orientation, political philosophy, or beliefs.



The principle of confidentiality in dealing with research information is one of the most important principles of AJAS.

Conflicts of Interest

Manuscript submitted to the AJAS is not to be used by editors or Board members for their own personal purposes. The Board members should refrain from reviewing manuscripts that may personally have conflicts of interest resulting from competition, collaboration, or personal relationships with any parties involved, such as the authors, companies, or institutions relevant to the said research.

Publication Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief must make sure that all material submitted for publication is peer-reviewed by at least two expert reviewers in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is accountable for publication decisions based on the opinion of the reviewers, the importance of the work to researchers and readers, and reviewers’ comments and amendment requests.

Measures against the Violation of Publication Ethics

The Editorial Board takes quick action in the event of any ethical problems relating to the submitted research. Any work that violates the publication ethics is to be investigated, even if discovered years after publication, and appropriate legal measures shall be taken accordingly.

For Reviewer:

Contribution to Editorial Board Decisions

Reviewers assist the editorial board in making acceptance decisions; they further contribute to improving the quality of the manuscript by reviewing it objectively within the specified time frame.


The AJAS shall make all reasonable efforts to stay in contact with the reviewers and urge them to submit their assessments on time. Should the delay be noted, the Editorial Board may have to choose another reviewer.


Confidentiality is to be respected throughout the peer-review process. Submitted material or information must not be shared or discussed with anyone unless prior permission is provided by the editor-in-chief. This applies to board members as well as referees.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviewers must assess the submitted manuscripts objectively. Comments and suggested amendments must be clearly made to help authors improve their work avoiding personal criticism.


Reviewers should point out any source the author used yet failed to acknowledge or reference in their manuscript. Reviewers must notify the editorial board of any salient similarity they spot between the submitted article and any other known to them.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers who may have conflicts of interest for any reason should notify the Editorial Board so the latter can select a replacement. Information contained in the submitted material should not be used in the reviewers’ own work.  All information involved throughout the review process should be regarded as confidential. This also applies to all invited reviewers including those who decline the invitation.

For Publisher:

Dealing with Unethical Publication Conduct

In the case of an alleged or proven scientific violation or fake information or plagiarism, the Editorial Board shall take appropriate measures to investigate the case and deal with it in accordance with the procedures and bylaws of the Kuwait University Academic Publishing Council. This could lead to the complete withdrawal of the work.

Journal of Law
Journal of Law

You are Visitor No.


Journal of Law
Tell your friendsJournal of Law
Journal of Law
Journal of Law

Last Updated

Nov 19, 2019

Journal of Law
Journal of Law
Journal of Law

Please enter your email Here to receive our news

Journal of Law