Generative AI policies for journals

Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-Assisted Technologies

1. Purpose and Scope

De Jure: Jurnal Hukum dan Syar'iah recognizes that generative artificial intelligence (AI), large language models (LLMs), chatbots, AI-assisted writing tools, automated analytical systems, and other AI technologies are increasingly used in academic research and scholarly publishing.

De Jure permits the responsible and transparent use of AI-assisted technologies when such technologies support, rather than replace, the intellectual contribution, legal reasoning, scholarly judgment, and accountability of human authors.

This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, editorial board members, editorial staff, and other individuals involved in the publication process of De Jure.

The fundamental principle of this policy is:

AI may assist scholarly work, but responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, confidentiality, and scholarly judgment of published work always remains with human researchers and publication professionals.

AI systems cannot serve as authors, reviewers, editors, or autonomous decision-makers for De Jure.

2. Human Responsibility and Accountability

The use of AI does not transfer or reduce the responsibilities of authors, reviewers, or editors.

Authors remain fully responsible for:

  1. the accuracy and validity of their arguments;

  2. the originality and integrity of their manuscripts;

  3. the accuracy of legal authorities, statutes, regulations, court decisions, cases, doctrines, and scholarly references;

  4. the accuracy of quotations and translations;

  5. the interpretation of empirical data and interview findings;

  6. compliance with research ethics and applicable laws;

  7. protection of confidential and personal information; and

  8. the final version of the manuscript submitted to De Jure.

Authors must independently review and verify all AI-assisted outputs before incorporating them into a manuscript.

AI-generated content must not be accepted merely because it appears authoritative, legally plausible, or linguistically sophisticated.

3. Permitted Use of AI by Authors

Authors may use AI-assisted technologies in a limited and supportive manner during manuscript preparation.

Permitted uses may include:

  • improving grammar, spelling, punctuation, and academic language;

  • improving readability and clarity of author-written text;

  • assisting with translation, subject to human verification;

  • identifying possible keywords or search terms;

  • assisting with the organization of author-generated material;

  • suggesting alternative wording or sentence structures;

  • assisting with formatting or compliance checks against journal requirements; and

  • assisting with non-substantive editorial or technical tasks.

The use of AI must not replace the author's own legal reasoning, interpretation, analysis, or scholarly judgment.

For De Jure, the preferred use of generative AI is limited to language and editorial assistance. Authors should not delegate the substantive intellectual work of legal research to generative AI.

4. AI Use in Legal Research and Analysis

Because De Jure publishes legal and socio-legal scholarship, authors must exercise particular caution when using AI in relation to legal materials.

AI-generated legal analysis must not be treated as an authoritative legal source.

Authors must independently verify:

  • legislation and regulations;

  • court decisions and judicial opinions;

  • legal doctrines and principles;

  • international legal instruments;

  • fatwas and Islamic legal opinions;

  • legal terminology;

  • quotations from legal authorities;

  • case names and case numbers;

  • dates and status of legislation;

  • academic references and DOI information; and

  • empirical claims and interview findings.

AI-generated legal reasoning may contain inaccurate, outdated, incomplete, or fabricated legal authorities. Therefore, authors remain responsible for conducting the actual legal analysis and for consulting the original authoritative sources.

AI must not be used as a substitute for the author's interpretation of primary legal materials.

5. Prohibited and Unacceptable Uses

The following uses of AI are prohibited:

5.1 Fabrication and falsification

Authors must not use AI to:

  • fabricate research data;

  • invent interview participants;

  • invent interview quotations;

  • fabricate survey responses;

  • fabricate observations;

  • manufacture empirical findings;

  • falsify legal documents;

  • create non-existent court decisions;

  • fabricate legislation or regulations; or

  • generate evidence that is presented as genuine research evidence.

5.2 Fabricated references and legal authorities

Authors must not submit AI-generated references without independently verifying them.

AI-generated or AI-suggested references must be checked against the original source.

The fabrication of:

  • journal articles;

  • books;

  • legal cases;

  • statutes;

  • regulations;

  • court decisions;

  • DOI numbers;

  • quotations;

  • page numbers; or

  • other bibliographic information

constitutes a serious breach of publication ethics.

5.3 Misrepresentation of intellectual contribution

Authors must not use AI to generate substantial substantive arguments, theoretical contributions, legal interpretations, findings, or conclusions and present them as entirely their own intellectual work without appropriate human development, critical assessment, and disclosure where required.

5.4 Plagiarism and copyright infringement

AI must not be used to conceal plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate text reuse, copyright infringement, or unattributed reproduction of another person's intellectual work.

Authors remain responsible for ensuring that AI-assisted content does not contain improperly reproduced material.

5.5 Manipulation of research evidence

AI must not be used to manipulate photographs, documents, interview evidence, empirical data, or other research materials in a way that changes their evidentiary meaning.

5.6 Circumvention of research ethics

AI must not be used to circumvent:

  • ethical approval requirements;

  • informed-consent requirements;

  • privacy obligations;

  • confidentiality obligations;

  • data-protection requirements; or

  • other applicable research-ethics requirements.

6. AI and Authorship

AI systems, including ChatGPT, Gemini, Claude, Copilot, or other generative AI systems, cannot be listed as authors or co-authors of articles published by De Jure.

Authorship requires human intellectual contribution and responsibility, including responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and final approval of the work.

AI systems cannot:

  • take responsibility for a manuscript;

  • approve the final version;

  • disclose conflicts of interest;

  • respond to editorial inquiries;

  • defend the research;

  • provide informed consent to publication; or

  • accept accountability for scholarly misconduct.

Accordingly, AI-assisted technologies shall not be included in the author list or represented as authors.

7. Disclosure of AI Use

Authors must disclose the material use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies during manuscript preparation.

The disclosure should identify:

  1. the name of the AI tool;

  2. the model or version, where relevant;

  3. the purpose of its use;

  4. the stage or section of the manuscript in which it was used; and

  5. confirmation that the authors reviewed, verified, and revised the AI-assisted output.

Disclosure of AI use is a transparency requirement and does not, by itself, constitute grounds for rejection.

Recommended Declaration

Authors may use the following statement:

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Manuscript Preparation
During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [NAME OF AI TOOL/SERVICE AND VERSION, IF APPLICABLE] for [DESCRIBE PURPOSE, e.g., language editing, grammar checking, translation, or improving readability]. The author(s) subsequently reviewed, verified, and revised the AI-assisted output and take full responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, originality, and content of the final manuscript.

Where AI was not used, authors may state:

Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Manuscript Preparation
The author(s) declare that no generative AI or AI-assisted technologies were used in the preparation of this manuscript.

The declaration should be placed in the manuscript according to the journal's current author guidelines, preferably after the Acknowledgements and before the References.

8. AI Use in Research Methodology

If AI is itself an object, instrument, analytical tool, computational method, or component of the research methodology, its use must be described transparently in the Methodology/Methods section.

Authors should report, where relevant:

  • the AI system or model used;

  • the developer or provider;

  • model/version;

  • date of access;

  • purpose and role of the AI system;

  • input data;

  • relevant prompts or instructions;

  • analytical procedures;

  • human verification procedures;

  • limitations of the AI system; and

  • the manner in which AI-assisted results were evaluated.

AI used as part of the research methodology is different from AI used merely for language editing and must be reported accordingly.

9. Literature Searching, Citations, and References

AI tools may assist authors in identifying search terms or organizing literature. However, AI must not be treated as an authoritative bibliographic database.

Authors are responsible for verifying every citation and reference.

Before submission, authors must independently confirm that:

  • the cited publication actually exists;

  • the author names are correct;

  • the title is accurate;

  • the journal or publisher is correct;

  • the publication year is correct;

  • the volume, issue, and pages are accurate where applicable;

  • the DOI or other identifier is valid; and

  • the cited source genuinely supports the proposition for which it is cited.

Particular care must be taken with AI-generated citations relating to legal cases, statutes, regulations, fatwas, court decisions, and international legal instruments.

Fabricated or materially inaccurate references may constitute a publication-ethics violation.

10. Confidentiality, Privacy, and Intellectual Property

Authors must not upload confidential, unpublished, proprietary, personal, or otherwise protected information to an AI system unless they have the legal and ethical authority to do so and adequate protection of the information can be assured.

This includes, but is not limited to:

  • unpublished manuscripts;

  • confidential interview transcripts;

  • personal data of research participants;

  • confidential legal documents;

  • privileged communications;

  • unpublished research findings;

  • proprietary datasets; and

  • confidential institutional documents.

Authors are responsible for compliance with applicable privacy, confidentiality, intellectual-property, and data-protection requirements.

11. Use of AI by Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality concerning manuscripts submitted to De Jure.

Reviewers must not upload, paste, submit, or otherwise transfer the manuscript, reviewer report, unpublished research, or confidential manuscript information to generative AI or other AI systems where confidentiality cannot be guaranteed.

AI must not be used to:

  • generate or replace the reviewer's substantive peer-review judgment;

  • evaluate a manuscript on behalf of the reviewer;

  • produce confidential reviewer reports without appropriate human assessment;

  • disclose confidential manuscript content; or

  • use unpublished ideas or information from the manuscript for the reviewer's own research.

If a reviewer uses an AI tool for a limited editorial purpose, such as language assistance in drafting a review, the reviewer remains fully responsible for the review and must ensure that no confidential manuscript content is disclosed to the AI system.

Reviewers should follow the confidentiality requirements of De Jure and disclose material AI use when requested by the journal.

12. Use of AI by Editors and Editorial Staff

Editors and editorial staff must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, author correspondence, and editorial decisions.

Editors and editorial staff must not upload confidential manuscript materials into AI systems where confidentiality cannot be assured.

AI must not independently determine:

  • acceptance;

  • rejection;

  • revision decisions;

  • reviewer selection;

  • allegations of misconduct;

  • authorship disputes; or

  • other substantive editorial decisions.

AI-assisted tools may be used only as supplementary administrative or editorial aids, subject to human oversight.

All editorial decisions remain the responsibility of the designated editor.

13. AI-Assisted Images, Tables, and Other Materials

AI-generated or AI-assisted images, diagrams, tables, or other visual materials may be used only when their use is scientifically, legally, and ethically appropriate.

Authors must ensure that:

  • the material does not misrepresent research evidence;

  • the material does not fabricate empirical findings;

  • copyright and licensing requirements are respected;

  • identifiable individuals are not improperly represented;

  • the material does not contain misleading information; and

  • material AI assistance is disclosed where relevant.

AI-generated images must not be presented as authentic documentary or empirical evidence.

14. Verification and Editorial Review

De Jure reserves the right to request clarification regarding the use of AI where there are reasonable concerns regarding:

  • fabricated references;

  • inaccurate legal authorities;

  • plagiarism;

  • fabricated data;

  • undisclosed AI use;

  • manipulated research evidence;

  • confidentiality violations; or

  • other potential breaches of publication ethics.

The journal may request authors to provide additional information concerning the role of AI in the preparation or conduct of the research.

AI detection software, where used, shall not by itself constitute conclusive evidence of misconduct. Any concern regarding AI use should be assessed through appropriate editorial and publication-ethics procedures.

15. Non-Disclosure and Misuse of AI

Failure to disclose material AI use, particularly where disclosure is required under this policy, may result in editorial action.

Depending on the circumstances, possible actions may include:

  • requesting clarification from the authors;

  • requesting correction of the manuscript;

  • requiring additional disclosure;

  • requesting revision;

  • rejection of the manuscript;

  • correction or clarification after publication;

  • retraction where serious misconduct has occurred; or

  • referral of the matter to the relevant institution or authority.

The appropriate action will depend on the nature, severity, and consequences of the suspected violation.

16. Fundamental Principle

The use of AI is not inherently inconsistent with scholarly publishing. However, responsible AI use requires human authorship, human judgment, transparency, verification, confidentiality, and accountability.

For De Jure, AI should function as an assistive technology rather than a substitute for legal scholarship.

The final scholarly contribution—including the formulation of the research problem, legal reasoning, interpretation of legal materials, empirical analysis, conclusions, and recommendations—must remain the responsibility of the human authors.

By submitting a manuscript to De Jure, authors confirm that they have complied with this AI policy and accept full responsibility for the content and integrity of their submission.

Policy Status: Effective upon publication on the De Jure website
Journal: De Jure: Jurnal Hukum dan Syar'iah
Policy subject to periodic review in accordance with developments in AI technology, scholarly publishing standards, and research-ethics requirements.