Focus and Scope

Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata ADHAPER (JHAPER) merupakan suatu jurnal open access memuat artikel-artikel yang telah di-review (peer-reviewed journal) dengan fokus kajian pada berbagai permasalahan di seputar hukum acara perdata. Artikel yang dapat dimuat dalam JHAPER adalah artikel hasil penelitian dan/ atau artikel konseptual (hasil pemikiran atau gagasan) di bidang hukum acara perdata. Meskipun memiliki fokus kajian pada hukum acara perdata terutama mengenai mengenai prosedur pemeriksaan perkara perdata di pengadilan (baik peradilan umum atau peradilan agama), hukum pembuktian, putusan dan pelaksanaan putusan pengadilan; namun JHAPER juga dapat memuat artikel-artikel dengan kajian mengenai proses penegakan hukum perdata materiil di luar pengadilan atau penyelesaian sengketa di luar pengadilan (out of court dispute settlement). Untuk itu JHAPER dapat memuat artikel-artikel mengenai negosiasi dalam rangka penyelesaian sengketa, mediasi, konsiliasi, arbitrase, penyelesaian sengketa keperdataan berbasis pada kearifan lokal dan model-model penyelesaian sengketa di luar pengadilan.

 

JHAPER terbit dua kali dalam setahun, yaitu pada Januari-Juni dan Juli-Desember. Pada umumnya artikel-artikel yang dimuat adalah hasil Konferensi Nasional Hukum Acara Perdata yang diselenggarakan setiap tahun oleh ADHAPER; namun, apabila dirasa perlu, JHAPER dapat mengundang artikel-artikel dengan topik khusus dan menerbitkannya dalam Edisi Khusus.

 

Dewan Redaksi JHAPER adalah para akademisi yang menekuni bidang keilmuan hukum acara perdata serta memiliki pengalaman ilmiah baik pada level nasional maupun internasional.

Section Policies

Articles

• Open Submissions
• Indexed
• Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

Setiap artikel yang akan dimuat melalui tahapan review tertutup oleh dua orang reviewer (blind peer review), nama penulis tidak dicantumkan dalam naskah artikel yang di-review. Identitas reviewer juga tidak diketahui oleh penulis artikel. Berdasarkan hasil penilaian kelayakan oleh dua orang reviewer, artikel akan diputuskan oleh Dewan Redaksi untuk langsung dapat dipublikasikan, memerlukan revisi atau perbaiakan atau tidak dapat dipublikasikan/ ditolak. Apabila tidak tercapai kesepakatan pada Dewan Redaksi mengenai apakah suatu artikel layak dipublikasikan atau tidak, Pemimpin Dewan Redaksi akan memutuskannya.

 

Kriteria penilaian kelayakan yang diterapkan adalah sebagai berikut:

-          Memiliki bobot ilmiah;

-          Memiliki relevansi dengan fokus dan ruang lingkup yang ditetapkan;

-          Artikel mudah dipahami dengan alur yang sistematis dan jelas;

-          Argumentasi disampaikan secara terstruktur menurut kaidah ilmiah (kejelasan metode deduksi atau induksi);

-          Menggunakan tata bahasa yang baik dan baku (baik dalam Bahasa Indonesia atau Bahasa Inggris);

-          Permasalahan yang akan dibahas dirumuskan dengan jelas;

-          Permasalahan yang dirumuskan dibahas secara komprehensif dan relevan dalam bagian pembahasan artikel;

-          Memiliki kecukupan referensi sebagai rujukan (literatur, jurnal, putusan badan peradilan dan sumber-sumber yang lain); dan

-          Format artikel dan pencantuman referensi dalam catatan kaki (footnote) sesuai dengan pedoman penulisan yang ditentukan.

 

JHAPER, melalui keputusan Dewan Redaksi, berhak untuk:

-            Langsung mempublikasikan artikel yang diajukan oleh penulis apabila artikel yang diajukan dinilai sangat layak berdasar pertimbangan dua reviewer tanpa kecuali;

-            Menyunting (editing) artikel yang diajukan dengan pemberitahuan terlebih dahulu kepada penulis sebelum diterbitkan;

-            Mengembalikan dan meminta agar artikel direvisi oleh penulis dalam jangka waktu tertentu sesuai dengan saran dari reviewer; atau

Menolak untuk mempublikasikan artikel baik dengan ataupun tanpa alasan tertulis yang disampaikan kepada penulis

Publication Frequency

JHAPER terbit dua kali dalam setiap tahun, yaitu pada bulan Januari-Juni dan Juli-Desember. Pada umumnya artikel-artikel yang dimuat adalah artikel yang telah dipresentasikan dalam Konferensi Nasional Hukum Acara Perdata yang diselenggarakan setiap tahun oleh ADHAPER. Dalam hal tertentu, JHAPER dapat menerbitkan edisi khusus dengan topik tertentu di bidang hukum acara perdata.

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.

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...

Publication Ethics

jhaper uses double blind reviewed journal published by Universitas Airlangga. This journal is available in print and online and highly respects the publication ethic and avoids any type of plagiarism. This statement explains the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor in chief, the editorial board, the peer-reviewers­­­­­ and the publisher (Universitas Airlangga). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication. The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal of Jhaper is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society.

Universitas Airlangga as publisher of Jhaper takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing seriously and we recognize our ethical behavior and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Faculty of Law Universitas Airlangga and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

 

Publication decisions.

The editor of the Jhaper is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play. The editor at any time evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

Confidentiality. The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.

 

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions. Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

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

Standards of Objectivity. Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources. Reviewers should identify 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 the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider 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 connected to the papers.

 

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

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 promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

 

======================

Editor-in-Chief
Jhaper.