Appeals of Editorial Decisions

Authors may request reconsideration when a substantive scholarly or procedural error may have affected an editorial decision. This policy applies to all manuscript decisions, including rejection without external review.

1. Grounds for Appeal
An appeal may be based on:

  • a material factual or technical misunderstanding of the submitted work;
  • relevant evidence or a response that appears to have been overlooked;
  • a documented departure from the published process, or a relevant conflict of interest that may have affected the decision.

Disappointment, urgency to publish, payment offers, or disagreement without scholarly grounds are not sufficient reasons to appeal. A substantially new study is not automatically treated as an appeal of the assessment of an earlier version.

2. Submitting an Appeal
Send a reasoned appeal to [email redaksi] with the subject line “Editorial Appeal – [Submission ID]”. The appeal should include:

  1. the manuscript title, submission ID, and decision date;
  2. the specific decision being challenged;
  3. a point-by-point explanation of the alleged error, with supporting evidence;
  4. confirmation that all authors support the appeal.

Submit the appeal promptly, while the assessment is still current. Do not create a duplicate submission to lodge an appeal. If any person involved presents a conflict of interest, identify them in the appeal so that it can be routed appropriately.

3. Independent Consideration
The editorial office acknowledges receipt and arranges for the appeal to be assessed by a suitably qualified editor who has no conflict of interest and did not make the decision being challenged. If no suitable internal editor is available, an independent external editor is engaged.

The original decision editor may explain the decision but must not be the sole assessor of the appeal. The assessor may consider the relevant records, reviewer reasoning, author responses, and additional specialist advice, subject to the [Confidentiality] policy.

Authors are informed of any significant delays. The journal does not guarantee a fixed completion period or a reversal of the decision. No fee is charged for considering an appeal.

4. Outcome and Submission Status
The outcome of an appeal may uphold the decision, reopen the assessment, request revision or additional review, or replace the decision with a justified alternative. Reopening the assessment does not mean acceptance. The outcome is communicated with reasons and recorded.

Once reconsideration has been opened, the manuscript is again under consideration by Al-Muhafidz and must not be under consideration elsewhere at the same time. Authors who have submitted the manuscript to another journal must disclose this before reconsideration begins. They may withdraw the appeal by written notice.

Repeated appeals based on the same grounds need not be reopened after a reasoned outcome has been given. Material new evidence, or a separate concern about how an appeal was handled, may be raised through the appropriate journal procedure.