Complaints and Appeals

  1. Purpose
    This policy is designed to ensure that the Journal of Public Administration and Policy (JAKP) handles complaints and appeals in a fair, transparent, and accountable manner. Complaints against journal governance and appeals against editorial decisions are seen as part of institutional improvement efforts. JAKP refers to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) as an ethical and procedural reference.
  2. Scope
    1. Complaints
      Complaints are expressions of objection to the editorial process or journal governance that are not directly related to the content of the manuscript. Examples of complaints include:
      • Delays in handling manuscripts that exceed a reasonable time;
      • Unprofessional behavior of journal editors or staff;
      • Technical problems that impede communication or access to information;
      • Discrepancies between journal policies and their implementation;
      • Alleged conflict of interest in the editorial process.
    2.  Appeals
      An appeal is a formal request from the author for the editor to review editorial decisions, especially manuscript rejection decisions. Appeals must be accompanied by valid academic reasons and supported by substantial evidence or argumentation. Appeals will not be processed if they are based solely on disagreement with scientific judgment without clear methodological basis.
  3. Handling Principles
    • Transparency: The handling process is carried out in an open and well documented manner.
    • Procedural Fairness: Each report is handled without prejudice and based on objectively available information.
    • Confidentiality: The identity of the reporter or appellant is kept confidential and only accessed by relevant parties.
    • Timeliness: An initial response will be provided within 5-7 working days of the complaint or appeal being received.
    • No Retaliation: The complainant or appellant will not suffer any negative consequences as long as acting in good faith.
  4. Procedure
    1. Complaint Handling
      • Submission
        Submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief through the official contact listed on the journal's website. The report must contain:
        • A brief description of the event or problem;
        • Date of the incident and parties involved (if any);
        • Relevant supporting evidence.
      • Verification and Handling
        The Editor-in-Chief will confirm receipt of the complaint within 5-7 working days. An internal investigation is conducted based on documentation, correspondence, and/or consultation with relevant parties.
      • Response and Follow-up
        The result of the investigation is submitted in writing. If the complaint is substantiated, the journal may take corrective action such as policy clarification, apology, or procedure adjustment. If not substantiated, the reasons for rejection will be conveyed.
      • Escalation
        If the complainant is not satisfied, they can submit a further evaluation to the journal management unit at the Andalas University level.
    2. Appeal Handling
      • Submission
        Appeals are sent by the correspondence author no later than 30 days after the editorial decision is received. The appeal letter must include:
        • The academic reasons underlying the appeal in detail;
        • Response to reviewer or editor comments;
        • Additional relevant evidence or information (if any).
      • Initial Evaluation
        The Editor-in-Chief will assess whether the appeal meets the substantive criteria. Appeals that are narrative or irrelevant will be rejected.
      • Review
        • The judgment of other editors not previously involved;
        • Clarification from the reviewer (if remaining anonymous);
        • Input from independent experts, if required.
      • Final Decision
        The final decision is final and submitted in writing. A manuscript can only be appealed once.
    Possible Outcomes:
    • Initial decision is upheld;
    • Manuscript is reviewed;
    • Decision reversed and manuscript returns to the editorial process;
    • Manuscript remains rejected with updated explanation.
  5. Documentation and Evaluation
    The entire complaint and appeal process will be recorded systematically and confidentially. The data is used for periodic evaluation to improve the quality of journal management and the effectiveness of this policy. Policy revisions will be made as needed based on the evaluation results and the development of ethical standards for scientific publications.