skip to main content

Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Jurnal CREPIDO: Jurnal Mengenai Dasar-Dasar Pemikiran Hukum Filsafat dan Ilmu Hukum known as Jurnal CREPIDO is an open-access and peer-reviewed academic journal.

Jurnal CREPIDO publishes selected articles through the peer-review process.

Jurnal CREPIDO aims to publish scientific articles in fundamental legal studies, including the Philosophy of Law and Science of Law. All novelty legal issues related to legal studies are required to be analyzed deeply with the approaches from the Science of Law, Theory of Law, and Philosophy of Law studies. Therefore, this academic journal may include but is not limited to various fields of law, such as Criminal Law, Civil Law, International Law, Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, Procedural Law, Law and Society, Islamic Law, Agrarian Law, Environmental Law, Commercial Law, Human Rights Law, Adat Law, and other fields of law related to the contemporary legal issues.


Section Policies


Checked Open Submissions
Checked Indexed
Checked Peer Reviewed


Peer Review Process / Policy

Jurnal CREPIDO uses a double-blind review system, both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process to meet standards of academic excellence. Jurnal CREPIDO will only process the submitted manuscripts via our Open Journal System (OJS). At the beginning of the process, Editor in Chief will check all the submitted manuscripts in the Submission on the OJS' Directory, whether they have met the Journal's requirements or not. Editor in Chief will determine which manuscripts will be processed. Editor in Chief will assign all the selected manuscripts to Managing Editor for further handling.

Below are the brief steps of the review process mechanism:

1. The Author submits the manuscript via our OJS: Before the submission, please do double-check whether your manuscript has met the requirements of Our Author Guidelines and Journal Template.

2. Editor in Chief will check and select the submitted manuscripts based on the Journal's criteria.

3. Editor in Chief will assign the selected manuscripts to the Managing Editor

4. Managing Editor will do the general check for the manuscripts, regarding the template format, the reference format, and plagiarism (we use Turnitin to find the similarity score).

5. Editor in Chief and Managing Editor will assign the manuscript to the Editor for the first review section (Editor Section).

6. In The Editor Section, Editor will review the writing format of the manuscript, whether it has met the requirement of Author Guidelines and Template, or not. If there a revision is required, the manuscript will send back to the Author. The Author must revise the manuscript based on Editor's suggestions/recommendations, then please send the revised manuscript back via OJS. The Editor will review the revised manuscript right away after they receive it. If there is no more revision required, the manuscript will be processed to the next step. From this Editor Section until the end of the review process, Editor in Chief and The Editor have the authority to make the Editor Decision for the manuscript. Following are the options of Editor Decision in our Journal: 1) Accept Submission; 2) Revisions Required; 3) Resubmit for Review; or 4) Decline/Reject Submission.

7. Editor in Chief and Managing Editor will assign the manuscript to the Peer Reviewer for the second review section (Peer Review Section).

8. In The Peer Review Section, Peer Reviewer will review the substance of the manuscript with the scientific approaches. If there a revision is required, the manuscript will send back to the Author. The Author must revise the manuscript based on Peer Reviewer's suggestions/recommendations, then please send the revised manuscript back via OJS. The Peer Reviewer will review the revised manuscript right away after they receive it. If there is no more revision required, the manuscript will be processed to the next step. From this Peer Review Section until the end of the review process, Editor in Chief and The Peer Reviewer have the authority to make the Peer Review Decision for the manuscript. Following are the options of Peer Review Decision in our Journal: 1) Accept Submission; 2) Revisions Required; 3) Resubmit for Review; 4) Resubmit Elsewhere; or 5) Decline/Reject Submission.

9. Editor in Chief and Managing Editor will evaluate all the processed manuscripts, and make the final decision.

10. Editor in Chief will notify the Authors (via e-mail) that their manuscripts have been accepted. Editor in Chief will ask/clarify The Author whether they agree that their manuscripts will be published in our journal.

11. After we receive the agreement from the Author, Editor in Chief will sign the Letter of Acceptance (LoA) for the selected manuscripts, then we will send the letter to the Author's e-mail.

12. Editor in Chief and Managing Editor will process the Galley Proofs and Publishing Process.

13. Managing Editor will publish/upload all the selected manuscripts on our OJS.

Jurnal CREPIDO requires the similarity score of the manuscript not more than 25%If the manuscript has over 25% of similarity, we will send the manuscript back to the author to be revised with the attachment file (Turnitin's similarity score result). 

Please notice, we require The Author to use Mendeley as the Reference Manager and American Psychological Association 6th Edition as the reference style.. If the manuscript does not meet the reference requirements, we will send the manuscript back to The Author to be revised.


Publication Frequency

Jurnal CREPIDO is published twice a year in July and November.


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.



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.


Publication Ethics

Jurnal CREPIDO is a peer-reviewed journal published by Bagian Dasar-Dasar Ilmu Hukum (Fundamental of Legal Studies Department) Faculty of Law Diponegoro University. The journal is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal as well as allegations of research misconduct, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the peer-reviewer­­­­­ and the publisher. This statement is based on the COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal of Jurnal CREPIDO 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.

Bagian Dasar-Dasar Ilmu Hukum (Fundamental of Legal Studies Department) Faculty of Law Diponegoro University as the publisher of Jurnal CREPIDO 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, reprinting or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on the editorial decisions. In addition, Bagian Dasar-Dasar Ilmu Hukum (Fundamental of Legal Studies Department) Faculty of Law Diponegoro University and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Allegations of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing an article by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, Editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and an assessment of whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest. 

If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the coauthors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article are sufficient. 

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, Jurnal CREPIDO will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Publication decisions

The editor of the Jurnal CREPIDO 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.

Complaints and Appeals

Jurnal CREPIDO will have a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board, or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to a respected person with respect to the case of complaint. The scope of complaints includes anything related to the journal business process, i.e. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guideline. The complaint cases should be sent by email to:

Fair play

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


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.

Acknowledgment 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.

Acknowledgment 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 conflicts 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.


If the research work involves procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey the ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, the Authors must provide legal ethical clearance from the association or legal organization. 

If the research involves confidential data and of business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not. 


As a journal author, you have rights for a large range of uses of your article, including use by your employing institute or company. These Author rights can be exercised without the need to obtain specific permission. 

Authors publishing in Jurnal CREPIDO have wide rights to use their works for teaching and scholarly purposes without needing to seek permission, including: use for classroom teaching by Author or Author's institution and presentation at a meeting or conference and distributing copies to attendees; use for internal training by author's company; distribution to colleagues for their research use; use in a subsequent compilation of the author's works; inclusion in a thesis or dissertation; reuse of portions or extracts from the article in other works (with full acknowledgement of final article); preparation of derivative works (other than commercial purposes) (with full acknowledgement of final article); voluntary posting on open web sites operated by author or author’s institution for scholarly purposes (follow CC by SA License).

Authors and readers can copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, as well as remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, but they must give appropriate credit (cite to the article or content), provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. If you remix, transform or build upon the material, you must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.


Peer-Review process/policy is declared here:


Jurnal CREPIDO accepts discussion and corrections on published articles by reader. In case the reader giving discussions and corrections toward a published article, the reader can contact by email to Editor in Chief by explaining the discussions and corrections. If accepted (by Editor in Chief), the discussions and correction will be published in next issue as Letter to Editor. Respected Authors can reply/answer the discussions and corrections from the reader by sending the reply to Editor in Chief. Therefore, Editors may publish the answer as Reply to Letter to Editor.


Anggita Doramia Lumbanraja
Bagian Dasar-Dasar Ilmu Hukum (Fundamental of Legal Studies Department) Faculty of Law Diponegoro University


Article Charge

This journal does not charge Article Processing Charges (APCs) and Article Publication Fee (Free)



Artikel-artikel yang dimuat dalam Jurnal Crepido (CREPIDO, ISSN : 2715-286 (online)) diindeks dalam indeks-indeks berikut ini :


CrossMark Applying on Crepido


Applying the CrossMark icon is a commitment by Jurnal CREPIDO: Jurnal Mengenai Dasar-Dasar Pemikiran Hukum Filsafat dan Ilmu Hukum to maintain the published content published and alert readers to changes if and when they occur.

What is Crossmark?

CrossMark, a multi-publisher initiative from CrossRef, provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of a document. Jurnal CREPIDO: Jurnal Mengenai Dasar-Dasar Pemikiran Hukum Filsafat dan Ilmu Hukum recognizes the importance of the integrity and completeness of the scholarly record to researchers and librarians and attaches the highest importance to maintaining trust in the authority of its electronic archive. Clicking on the CrossMark icon will inform the reader of the document's current status and may also provide additional publication record information about the document.