How to Avoid Predatory Journals? What about the Lex Generalis Law Journal?

Many people ask whether the Lex Generalis law journal is a predatory journal or not. Whether through Google platforms or doubts from several parties because they realize that our journal is published monthly throughout the year. Here we will provide a comprehensive explanation. We understand the concerns of fellow authors in the academic community, including lecturers, researchers, and especially students.

To illustrate, the definition of a predatory journal itself, according to many sources, is a journal that is solely profit-oriented without regard for the quality of the journal, let alone adhering to the publication ethics of scientific writing. Usually, predatory journals do not conduct a review process involving expert reviewers in the field. Or even if there is a review process, it is merely a formality, which then allows the predatory journal to easily accept articles (as long as the author pays).

In terms of cost, predatory journals charge a very high and unreasonable fee (Article Processing Charge/APC) for their grade (usually based on the accreditation/indexation achieved). Furthermore, predatory journals often do not transparently list publication fees (including a breakdown of what the allocation is for) on a link that is easily accessible on the journal's website. There are also journals that charge no fees, but profit, for example, through the misuse of personal data by promising rapid publication. Thus, apart from cost, publication time also becomes a parameter to assess whether a journal is predatory or not.

Usually, predatory journals publish articles within days (again, due to the absence of a review process or because the review is merely a formality). In contrast, we, because of the Editorial Review process, content review by Peer Reviewers, and the editing stages that follow specific procedures, require months (generally 3 months), especially for regular issues published according to schedule. As for the Fast Track service of Lex Generalis Law Journal, accredited SINTA 4, publication can occur as early as the following month after the author submits the manuscript. This is after undergoing review (as quickly as 2 weeks) and editing (as quickly as 1 week after the author completes revisions).

Even though most of us here do not come from campuses/universities or government institutions/agencies as our affiliates, we have a strong scientific background. We have extensive experience in research and scholarly work, and some of us have even published works outside the general law journals. Therefore, we have a thorough understanding of the bare minimum of acceptable publications, particularly those aligned with the SINTA 4 grade in general, although we always strive for most of our submissions to be of good quality because we hope to reach SINTA 2.

We also do not randomly select peer reviewers to review the submitted works. Although some of our peer reviewers are not from a campus/university, we are well aware that they are experts in specific areas of law, and therefore it is not surprising that they are assigned tasks according to their expertise (whether as academics or practitioners). We do not randomly take law graduates to review legal writings in general, even if it is not their field. We do not use the method of assigning well-known reviewers who do not contribute much or only perform general reviews. We conduct single-peer reviews but certainly with experts in their field, rather than double-peer reviews that only provide general assessments and may not be targeted. Our peer reviewers have publications at least in SINTA 2 journals, DOAJ, or even SCOPUS.

We take the management of scientific journals very seriously because we are aware of the consequences of publishing articles that do not meet writing standards or publication ethics, especially those with low eligibility standards, which have the potential to generate errors in thinking or at least in data/legal sources. If such articles are cited by subsequent writings as references, it will become our responsibility, even in the hereafter, as a continuing sin. Therefore, during the editorial review and editing process before publication, our editors always carefully review, skim, and scan to minimize errors. Should any errors occur, we will implement correction, retraction, or corrigendum mechanisms.

Our website also provides all the information needed by authors, including author guidelines, terms and conditions, submission stages and procedures, fees (Article Processing Charge), publication time, editorial board, reviewers, indexing, and so on, which are usually incomplete (or even impossible to find and transparent) in a predatory journal. We also provide a responsive hotline, not just a formal email that sometimes responds (once a week or once a month) or even does not respond at all. This ensures that questions about publication can be accommodated and answered, which in turn facilitates the process from the beginning until the article is published.

In addition, we also conduct strict reviews. From the beginning, we organize an editorial review to assess whether the topic in the manuscript aligns with our focus and scope or at least contains legal/policy aspects. Some manuscripts, such as those solely focused on economics, politics, or pure education without legal and policy elements, are certainly rejected. In terms of substance evaluation by peer reviewers, we require authors to revise their manuscripts; otherwise, the articles will not be processed for publication. Even at the pre-publication stage, our editors perform editing along with a final check to minimize errors.

We have also been accredited with SINTA 4, whereas predatory journals are usually only indexed by obscure or questionable indexing agencies. It can be ensured that there is synchronization between the website link you are currently reading and paying attention to, and the link in our SINTA profile provided below. Meanwhile, elsewhere, there are so-called "fake SINTA journals," which refer to fake SINTA sites or former SINTA journals whose accreditation has been revoked. Our SINTA accreditation is still active at present until a new accreditation emerges, and even our Google Scholar profile has been cited by thousands of publications. Therefore, we have a reputation as a reputable national law journal, which can even be synchronized with SINTA ID and SISTER profiles, especially for lecturers and researchers. You can also view our indexing institutions or platforms, including renowned universities and institutions abroad.

Thus, returning to the initial and fundamental question that raises doubts, concerns, suspicions, and inquiries from the academic community regarding whether the Lex Generalis Law Journal is considered a predatory journal, the answer is certainly no. We set Article Processing Charges (APC) that are very common for SINTA 4 journals (in fact, after conducting a market price survey, the fees we set tend to be lower compared to other journals). The APC is allocated to pay qualified peer reviewers, editing costs, DOI registration, website maintenance (premium HOSTINGER/NIAGAHOSTER domain and hosting with a very low history of downtime, highest server quality, and unlimited storage).

In addition, combined with a very reasonable publication timeframe (2-3 months of processing), reputable editors and peer reviewers, a solid academic history, and excellent journal management, make Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis far from being considered a predatory journal. The issue of the number of issues we publish each month (12 issues) in a year is also not a problem, because there are many reputable scientific journals out there that publish monthly editions, as long as quality is not compromised and publication ethics are strictly followed. It is very rare for peer reviewers (and of course our final decision as editors) to accept a paper without revisions, except if the article and writing quality are exceptionally good. Most of the submitted articles receive revisions, whether minor or major, to ensure the quality and suitability of the articles that we will publish. Because our editorial board not only acts as reviewers and editors, but also as Quality Assurance (QA) similar to a batch in a production line.