The Journal of Malaysian and Comparative Law (JMCL) accepts submissions of original unpublished works comprising articles, comments, case notes and reviews on the whole spectrum of legal topics and issues. Submissions can be made throughout the year. However, deadlines for the respective editions are generally as follows:
June: By the end of February
December: By the end of July
Preparation of Manuscripts
- Articles should not exceed the maximum of 10,000 words (including footnotes); articles shorter than this are favoured. Articles should be accompanied by an abstract of 150-250 words and keywords of not more than 5 words.
- The type setting format for the whole article is as follows:
- a) Microsoft Word ONLY
- b) Font size: 12
- c) Font style: Times New Roman
- d) Double-spaced
- e) Justified margins of 2.54 cm top and bottom, right and left
- f) Footnotes should be used, not endnotes in compliance with the Australian Guide to Legal Citation.
- Final responsibility for the accuracy of all citations and quotations rests with the authors.
- Quotations of more than 30 words should be indented without quotation marks. Shorter quotations within the text should be enclosed by double inverted commas.
- Manuscripts must be accompanied with the following information on a separate file:
- Corresponding address
- Name of author(s) and affiliation
- Contact number
- Name of file attached
- The Journal adopts the Australian Guide to Legal Citation as its house style available here.
- i) Authors and co-authors must list or relevant affiliations to attribute where the research or scholarly work was approved and/or supported and/or conducted. If authors have moved to a different institution, they must include a note to state their current affiliation.
- ii) Authors without a current relevant institutional affiliation should state their independent status.
- Competing Interests
- i) Authors and co-authors must declare any competing interests relevant to or which can be perceived to be relevant to the article.
- ii) A competing interest can occur where you (or your employer, sponsor or family/friends) have a financial, commercial, legal, or professional relationship with other organizations, or with the people working with them which could influence the research or interpretation of the results.
iii) Competing interests can be financial or non-financial in nature. To ensure transparency, you must also declare any associations which can be perceived by others as a competing interest. Authors are required to disclose financial benefit or interests that have arisen from the direct application of their research.
- Funding details
Please supply all details required by your funding and grant-awarding bodies by listing each funding agency and corresponding grant number.
Ethics and Malpractice Statement
JMCL accepts manuscripts for reviews on the basis that the manuscript:
- Is the author's original work;
- Has not been previously published and is not being considered for publication elsewhere;
- Does not contain anything abusive, defamatory, libellous, obscene, objectionable, misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive.
It is to be noted that there is no fee for publication, nor will the Author receive any royalties for publication.
The Journal of Malaysian and Comparative Law (JMCL) is a peer reviewed international journal committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics.
- JMCL has no tolerance for plagiarism, copyright infringement or other malpractices in publication and views these issues very seriously.
- JMCL seeks to protect the rights of authors and will promptly investigate claims of copyright infringement, plagiarism, publication malpractice or misuse of published material. Articles submitted to JMCL are also checked with duplication-checking software. Where an article is found to contain plagiarism or third-party copyright material without permission or with insufficient acknowledgement, JMCL reserves the right to take action to remedy the situation including, but not limited to, publishing corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies.
To that end, all actors involved in publication, namely authors, reviewers and the members of the editorial team, are expected to adhere fully to our publication ethics and malpractice policy.
STATEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITIES
- Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit, guarding against business needs compromising intellectual and ethical standards. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author.
- Striving constantly to improve the journal, editors must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors.
- Editors should ensure the integrity of the academic record and publication review process. As such, editors should:
i) be wiling to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.
ii) not reveal either the identity of authors of manuscripts to the reviewers, or the identity of reviewers to authors.
- Editors must ensure that all the information related to submitted manuscripts is kept confidential before publishing.
EDITORIAL BOARD'S RESPONSIBILITIES
- The Editorial Board is responsible for deciding suitability for publication of submitted articles striving always to meet the needs of readers and authors.
- The Editorial Board must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.
- The Editorial Board is accountable for everything published in the journal, thus he/she has complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article. However, published manuscripts do not represent the stand or opinion of the Editorial Board and the Management Team of the JMCL, or the Faculty of Law, Universiti Malaya, Malaysia.
- The Editorial Board should strive to constantly improve their journal including by having processes in place to assure the quality of the material published. It must also actively contribute to the development and the greater good of the journal such as by taking reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, and conducting proper and fair investigations into ethics complaints.
- Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential. Reviewers must not show or discuss manuscripts with others except as authorized by the Editor.
- Reviewers must not have conflicts of interest with respect to the research, the authors or the research funding. Rather they must disclose any competing interest before agreeing to review a submission and review all submissions objectively, fairly and professionally.
- Judgments by the reviewers should be as objective as possible. There shall be no personal criticism of the author. They should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
- In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete a review of a manuscript within the stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the Editor, so that the manuscript can be sent to another reviewer.
- Reviewers must report any breach of publication ethics or any malpractice discovered while reviewing to the Editor for further action.
- Reviewers must ensure the originality of a submission and be alert to any plagiarism, copyright infringement or publication malpractice.
- The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
- Authors must ensure that the manuscript has not been submitted elsewhere. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
- Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. 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.
- Manuscripts must not contain anything abusive, defamatory, libellous, obscene, objectionable, misleading or deceptive or likely to mislead or deceive.
- There is no fee for publication, nor will the author receive any royalties for publication.
- If at any point of time, an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a submitted manuscript, then the error or inaccuracy must be reported to the Editor. If the Editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the Editor of the correctness of the original paper.
TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT
JMCL accepts manuscripts that have not been published elsewhere and are not under consideration for publication by other print or electronic media. The authors agree to transfer the copyright to the JMCL editorial office. However, it can be reprinted with a proper acknowledgement that it was published in JMCL.
Peer Review Process
The journal's peer review process can be broadly summarized into seven (7) steps.
- The submitting author submits the manuscript to the journal. This is usually done via the journal online system. Occasionally, the journal may accept submissions by email. The journal acknowledges receipt of submitted manuscripts within 1 to 2 days.
- The manuscript is reviewed internally by the working editorial committee. This is to check the manuscript's composition and arrangement against the journal's Submission Guidelines. If approved, the manuscript is sent to the Managing Editor for review.
- The Managing Editor reviews the manuscript. This is to check that the manuscript is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original, interesting and relevant. If approved, the manuscript is ready for peer review.
- The journal's peer review process is a double- blind review process, namely, the reviewers do not know the names of the author(s), and the author(s) do not know who reviewed their manuscript. Manuscripts below 7,000 words undergo a double- blind review process by a single reviewer while manuscripts above 7,001 words undergo a double- blind review process by two reviewers. The journal's policy is to send the manuscript to the journal's subject-matter editors for review. If the journal does not have subject-matter editors on the particular manuscript's subject-matter, the Managing Editor sends invitations to individuals whom he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers based on their field of expertise and research.
- The reviewers will review the manuscript. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept the manuscript, reject the manuscript or with a request for amendments (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.
- The Managing Editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision.
If both reviewers reject the manuscript, the journal will reject the manuscript outright.
If both reviewers unconditionally accept the manuscript, the journal will accept the manuscript.
If both reviewers accept the manuscript conditionally and subject to further amendments, the author will be informed to amend the manuscript accordingly.
If one reviewer accepts and the other reviewer rejects the manuscript, the manuscript will be reconsidered by the working editorial committee. At this stage, the manuscript may be sent for a third review so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision whether to accept or reject the manuscript.
- The Managing Editor sends a decision email to the author, including any relevant reviewer comments and/or amendments to be made to the manuscript.
If accepted, the manuscript is sent for publication.
If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the reviewer's comments will be communicated to the author to help the author improve the article.
If the manuscript was sent back for major revision, the reviewers may be sent the amended version, unless they have opted out of further participation.
Where only minor changes were requested, a follow-up review may be done by the Managing Editor.
The review process commonly takes between 5 to 9 weeks and authors are kept informed throughout the entire process.
The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.