Al-Risalah: Jurnal Ilmu Syariah dan Hukum recognizes that scholarly evaluation and scientific discussion may continue after an article has been published. The journal is committed to preserving the accuracy, transparency, credibility, and integrity of the scholarly record by providing appropriate channels for readers and researchers to raise substantive questions, present evidence-based critiques, and discuss the findings, arguments, methodologies, and interpretations of published articles.
Post-publication discussion is intended to promote constructive academic debate in Islamic law, Sharia studies, legal theory, comparative law, and related fields. All discussions must be conducted professionally, respectfully, and in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.
Readers and researchers may submit substantive comments on published articles through the journal's official submission system under the following formats:
A Letter to the Editor may address significant issues concerning a published article, including its legal reasoning, interpretation of primary or secondary sources, research methodology, analytical framework, or conclusions. The letter must identify the article being discussed and clearly explain the academic significance of the comments.
A Scholarly Commentary provides a focused and evidence-based critical discussion of a specific argument, finding, interpretation, or methodological issue presented in a published article. It must contribute meaningfully to scholarly debate and remain directly relevant to the original publication.
When a Letter to the Editor or Scholarly Commentary is considered suitable for publication, the journal will normally invite the authors of the original article to submit a response. The response should address the substantive issues raised and clarify the authors' reasoning, evidence, or conclusions where necessary.
The editorial team may publish the commentary and author response together or separately, depending on editorial considerations. Both submissions are subject to editorial assessment and, where appropriate, independent peer review.
When accepted for publication, a Letter to the Editor, Scholarly Commentary, or Author Response will be published as a separate scholarly contribution and assigned a DOI where eligible under the journal's publishing and DOI registration arrangements. The published contribution will be linked to the original article to maintain transparency and facilitate scholarly citation.
The journal generally seeks to conclude a discussion after the publication of the author's response. However, further contributions may be considered when new evidence, substantive unresolved questions, or other compelling scholarly reasons justify additional discussion.
All post-publication submissions must comply with the following requirements:
3.1. Scholarly Relevance and Evidence
Submissions must address a clearly identifiable scholarly issue relating to the target article. Critiques should be supported by verifiable evidence, relevant legal materials, reliable academic literature, sound methodological reasoning, or appropriate empirical data. Assertions must be proportionate to the evidence provided.
3.2. Professional and Respectful Language
Submissions must maintain an objective, constructive, and professional academic tone. Personal attacks, discriminatory language, harassment, defamatory statements, and unsupported allegations of research misconduct are unacceptable. Concerns about potential misconduct should be reported through the journal's appropriate publication ethics procedures.
3.3. Language and Length
Post-publication submissions should be written in English and should normally not exceed 1,000 words, excluding references. The journal may consider exceptions where the complexity or significance of the issue warrants additional explanation.
3.4. Submission Period
Readers are encouraged to submit comments within six months of the original article's publication. Submissions received after this period may still be considered when they raise substantial concerns about the accuracy, reliability, or integrity of the scholarly record.
3.5. Originality and Conflicts of Interest
Submissions must be original, must not be under consideration elsewhere, and must disclose any financial, professional, institutional, or personal relationships that could influence the author's commentary. All sources, supporting documents, and relevant data must be identified appropriately.
3.6. Scope and Exclusions
The post-publication discussion process is intended for scholarly engagement with published research. It is not a mechanism for appealing rejected manuscripts, resolving commercial disputes, promoting unrelated research, or expressing unsupported personal grievances.
The Editor-in-Chief or a designated editor will conduct an initial assessment of each submission to determine its relevance, scholarly merit, evidentiary basis, and compliance with the journal's ethical standards.
Where necessary, the editor may consult the original article's reviewers, invite independent subject specialists, or seek methodological or statistical advice. For submissions concerning Islamic legal interpretation, the journal may seek expert assessment of relevant jurisprudential sources, legal doctrines, statutory provisions, judicial decisions, or interpretive methods.
The editor may reject submissions that lack sufficient scholarly substance, contain unsupported allegations, fall outside the journal's scope, or fail to meet the journal's publication standards.
Editors and reviewers involved in the process must disclose relevant conflicts of interest and recuse themselves where their impartiality could reasonably be questioned. Decisions must be based on scholarly merit, evidence, relevance, and publication ethics rather than personal, institutional, or other improper considerations.
If a post-publication discussion or other credible information reveals a potential error or concern affecting a published article, the journal will assess the matter in accordance with its publication ethics policies and relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Depending on the nature, seriousness, and outcome of the assessment, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:
5.1. Correction
A correction notice may be issued when a published article contains an error or omission that requires formal correction but does not invalidate the overall reliability of the research or its principal conclusions. Examples include errors in author information, figures, tables, references, funding acknowledgements, or other published details.
5.2. Expression of Concern
An Expression of Concern may be published when credible questions arise regarding the reliability or integrity of an article and the available evidence is insufficient to reach a definitive conclusion, or when an investigation is ongoing and requires additional time. The notice will explain the concern to the extent that can be responsibly disclosed.
5.3. Retraction
A retraction may be issued when the published work is found to be sufficiently unreliable because of serious errors, invalid findings, fabricated or falsified data, plagiarism, redundant publication, or other substantial breaches of publication ethics. Retraction decisions will be made following an appropriate assessment of the available evidence and relevant ethical guidance.
The journal will provide a clear explanation for any correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction. These actions are intended to protect the integrity of the scholarly record rather than to punish authors.
The journal does not permit silent or misleading alterations to published articles. The originally published version of record will be preserved, subject to applicable preservation and technical requirements.
Any subsequent correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction will be documented through a formal notice linked to the original article. Where technically and editorially appropriate, the notice will include the publication date, the reason for the action, and the relationship between the notice and the original article.
The journal will maintain appropriate publication records to ensure that readers can identify the current status of an article and distinguish the original publication from any subsequent editorial notice.
Authors submitting a post-publication response must address the issues raised accurately and in good faith. They should provide relevant evidence or clarification where appropriate and avoid personal or speculative arguments.
Authors of the original article are encouraged to respond to substantive scholarly critiques. However, the journal retains editorial responsibility for deciding whether a response is necessary, suitable, and appropriate for publication.
All participants in post-publication discussion are expected to respect research integrity, confidentiality where applicable, intellectual property rights, and the rights of other contributors to engage in scholarly debate.
Readers, researchers, and other interested parties who identify potential errors, methodological concerns, or possible breaches of publication ethics in an article published by Al-Risalah: Jurnal Ilmu Syariah dan Hukum may contact the Editorial Office or submit a formal Letter to the Editor through the journal's official submission system.
Submissions should include:
The title, DOI, or permanent link of the article concerned.
A clear description of the issue or concern.
Supporting evidence, relevant references, legal materials, or data where available.
A disclosure of any relevant conflicts of interest.
Journal: Al-Risalah: Jurnal Ilmu Syariah dan Hukum
Submission Portal: https://journal.uin-alauddin.ac.id/index.php/al_risalah/about/submissions
All concerns will be assessed fairly, confidentially where appropriate, and in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies. The journal reserves the right to take proportionate editorial action when necessary to maintain the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record.
JOURNAL TEMPLATE
SUBMISSION
ACCREDITATION
INFORMATION
TOOLS
SCOPUS CITEDNESS
