Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Politea : Jurnal Pemikiran Politik Islam is peer-reviewed and open access journal published by Department of Islamic Political Thought, Faculty of Da’wah and Communication, State Islamic Institute of Kudus (IAIN Kudus).

Politea is registered with E-ISSN: 2657-1560 and P-ISSN: 2621- 0312. Every article published in Politea has been assigned with DOI (prefix by crossref: 10.21043) and indexed in Science and Technology Index (SINTA 3). Becoming a reputable journal has encouraged Politea to welcome articles not only in Bahasa Indonesia but also in English version.

Politea is available online in 2018 and published twice a year in June and December. Politea aims to provide readers with highly scholarly articles related to the discourse of Islamic political thought covering some following topics:

Classical and contemporary islamic political thought
Islam and public policy
Islamic political leadership
Islam, gender, and politics
Islam, democracy, and civil society
Islamic political party, election, and legislation
State and islamic government system
Islamic political issues at global level

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions
Indexed
Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Registration needs to be completed by the author(s) before the submission of their manuscript.
Editor in chief would conduct initial reviews with these points as major considerations, (1) Conformity of manuscript with focus and scope; (2) Significance and novelty of manuscript; (3) Conformity to guidelines of the manuscript; (4) Similarity check of the manuscript; (5) Copyright transfer agreement and statement of originality form availability.
A decision is made by the editor in chief in initial review with some of these decision types, (1) A rejected to peer-review process: here, the manuscript would be sent back to the author(s) with attached comments; (2) A revision to the peer-review process: here, the manuscript is sent back to the author(s) with attached comments. The comments would direct the author(s) on what they need to before they re-upload to the system; (3) Accepted to peer-review process: here, the manuscript would be sent to the section editor for reviewers' selection.
Section editor would take out time to select the best reviewers for the manuscript. Once they are done, the manuscripts would be external reviewers for the double-blind peer-review process.
The external reviewer gives insightful comments for the manuscript with the following recommendations, (1) Accepted as it is; (2) Minor revision; (3) Major revision; (4) Completely rejected.
From this point, section editor and editor in chief would consider reviewers’ recommendations and comments before making the following decisions, (1) Completely rejected: manuscript failed the consideration process for publication; (2) Accepted as it is: there are no revisions to the manuscript, and everything has been accepted the way it is; (3) Minor revisions: the manuscript has to be revised concerning the minor comments of the reviewer; (4) Major revision: the manuscript has to be revised based on the major comments of the reviewer.
If the section editor and editor in chief accept the manuscript, then the manuscript would be sent to the copyeditor for typesetting and copyediting before it is sent back to the author(s) for a final overall check.
If the necessary changes needed by author(s) having major and minor revisions are made before resubmission back into the system, then the section editor would determine whether would go to the next round of revision or not.
If the manuscript is rejected by the section editor and editor in chief, the author(s) would be notified that the manuscript failed to be considered for publication. This decision is followed with detailed comments.
Once the layout is completed, the letter of acceptance is sent to the author(s) alongside the manuscript version.

Publication Frequency

Politea : Jurnal Pemikiran Politik Islam publishes issue twice a year in June and December. Every edition contains eight peer-reviewed research articles.

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. Articles are published under the terms of a Creative Commons license which permits the use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

This journal is open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to users or / institution. 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 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, they are 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 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...

Plagiarism Issue

Politea : Jurnal Pemikiran Politik Islam spares NO tolerance towards plagiarism. To ensure the originality of the manuscript, TURNITIN is used to evaluate the similarity index and then the editor decides the suspected case of plagiarism (author will be notified for similarity report). The rubric of assessment by editorial board shall follow these standards:

Similarity Index more than 40%: Article Rejected (due to poor citation and/or poor paraphrasing, article outright rejected, NO RESUBMISSION accepted).
Similarity Index (10-40%): Send back to the author for improvement (author should revise by giving proper citations to all places of similarity and alter for better paraphrasing even if the citation is provided).
Similarity index less than 10%: Accepted or citation refinement should be given (proper citations must be provided to all outsourced texts).

In cases 2 and 3: The authors should rectify the manuscript carefully, add required citations, and do good paraphrasing from original text. Author may resubmit the article with a new Turnitin report showing NO PLAGIARISM and similarity less than 10%.

Complaints and Appelas from Authors

Politea : Jurnal Pemikiran Politik Islam is open for appeals to journal editor decisions and complaints about a journal’s editorial management of the peer review process.

Editor Decisions

Any appeals to the editor decisions are welcomed. However, the author needs to provide strong evidence or new data/information in response to the editor’s and reviewers’ comments.

If you wish to appeal a journal editor’s decision, please send an appeal letter to our email ([email protected]). Please address this to the editor and explain clearly the reason. Why the author disagrees with the decision with a specific reason; new information or data that you would like the journal to take into consideration; evidence if you believe a reviewer has made technical errors in their assessment of your manuscript. Please include evidence if you believe a reviewer may have a conflict of interest.

Complaints to editorial management

Publication Ethics & Malpractice Statement

DUTIES OF EDITOR

Publication Decisions

The editors of Politea : Jurnal Pemikiran Politik Islam guarantees that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-assessment by at least two qualified reviewers from its field. The Head of Editor is accountable for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be posted, based on the validation of the work in question, its beneficial for researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal necessities as are currently in effect regarding libel, copyright violation and plagiarism. The Editor may negotiate with other editors or reviewers to make this decision final.

Fair Play

Editors appraise submitted manuscripts completely on the basis of their academic advantage, namely: importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity; and its relevance to the journal’s scope, while not relevance to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Head of Editor is in charge over the complete editorial content of the journal and the temporal arrangement of publication of that content.

Confidentiality

The Editors and any editorial staff must maintain the confidentiality of any information about a submitted manuscript only to the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

The Editors are not allowed to use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted article for their own research goals without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas gained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript will be kept secret and not used for their private benefit. Editors will not handle any considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, another member of the editorial board will be asked to handle the manuscript.

Management of unethical behaviors

The editors, alongside with the publisher(s), should take rationally responsive measures once ethical complaints are bestowed concerning a submitted manuscript or published article. Each reportable act of unethical publishing behavior is going to be looked into, even though it is discovered years after publication. For this reason, Politea : Jurnal Pemikiran Politik Islam has legal specialist within the field of Intellectual Property Rights as the Ethics Advisory Board.

DUTIES OF AUTHOR

Reporting Standards

Authors of original research should show an accurate account of the work performed and therefore the results, followed by an objective discussion of the importance of the work. The manuscript should contain adequate details and references to allow others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective and comprehensive, whereas editorial ‘opinion’ or perspective pieces should be clearly acknowledged as such. Deceitful or knowingly inaccurate statements represent unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data access and retention

Authors are asked to supply the raw data in reference with a paper for editorial review, and should be ready to provide public access, and should, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should make sure that they have written completely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism may take many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms represents unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. We will check every manuscript using a plagiarism checker (Turnitin) to confirm the originality of the article. Furthermore, each submitted article should be sent along with a letter of statement from the author(s) stating that the article is free from plagiarism.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

Papers describing essentially the same research must not be issued in more than one journal or primary publication. Thus, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been circulated in another journal. Submission of a manuscript synchronally to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of sources

Authors should confirm that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been significant in determining the nature of the reported work. Information acquired in private (from the conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties) must not be included or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information gained in the course of providing secret services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work concerned in these services.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be restricted to those who have created a major contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All parties who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Whilst there are others who have participated in certain considerable area of the research project, they should be acknowledged as contributors. The corresponding author should confirm that all co-authors have seen and approved the ultimate version of the paper and have approved to its submission for publication.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to inform the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to withdraw or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher acknowledges from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the responsibility of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Declaration of competing interests

All authors should reveal in their manuscript any financial support and personal relationships with other people or organizations that could be viewed as inappropriately influencing (bias) their work. All sources of financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article should be unveiled, as should the role of the sponsor(s), if any, in study design; in any part of data processing; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. If the funding source(s) had no such association then this should be stated in the paper. The author must announce any competing interests in the manuscript/paper template.

Image integrity

It is not acceptable to enhance, obscure, move, remove, or introduce a particular feature within an image. Changes of brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable if they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original. Manipulating pictures for improved clarity is acceptable, however manipulation for other purposes could be seen as scientific ethical abuse and will be restrained accordingly. Authors should accommodate with any specific policy for graphical images applied by the relevant journal, e.g. providing the original images as supplementary material with the article, or depositing these in a designated repository.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in creating editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may additionally assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness

Any selected referee who feels under qualification to review the research reported in a manuscript or is aware that its prompt review will be impossible should inform the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts acquired for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or mentioned with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be run objectively. Ad hominem of the author is inappropriate. Referees should articulate their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of sources

Reviewers should mention relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by proper citation. A reviewer should notify editor to any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper present.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas gained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal benefit. Reviewers should not accept manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions regarding to the papers.