Complaints and Appeals

Jurnal Venus, published by Politeknik Ilmu Pelayaran Makassar, Indonesia, is committed to providing an ethical, fair, accessible, confidential, and transparent process for addressing complaints and appeals. Authors, reviewers, readers, institutions, and other stakeholders may raise concerns regarding editorial conduct, peer review, journal procedures, published articles, research integrity, or editorial decisions.

Complaints and appeals are handled objectively, without retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith, and in accordance with applicable journal policies and recognized publication-ethics principles. Reference to Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidance does not imply that Jurnal Venus is a COPE member.

Complaints may include, but are not limited to:

• allegations of plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabrication, falsification, manipulated data, fabricated references, or other research and publication misconduct;
• concerns about the accuracy, integrity, reliability, or ethical standing of a published article;
• unfair treatment, discrimination, bias, inappropriate conduct, or abuse of editorial authority;
• procedural irregularities, unreasonable editorial delay, confidentiality breaches, inappropriate reviewer conduct, or conflicts of interest;
• concerns regarding authorship, copyright, licensing, attribution, or unauthorized use of scholarly material;
• inappropriate or undisclosed use of artificial intelligence by authors, reviewers, editors, or other parties involved in publication;
• disputes relating to editorial communication, corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, or application of journal policies.

Complaints should be submitted in writing to the Jurnal Venus Editorial Office. Where applicable, the complainant should use the email subject line “Complaint – Jurnal Venus – [Manuscript ID / Article DOI]”.

A complaint should include:

1. the complainant's name and contact details, unless reporting anonymously;
2. manuscript ID, article title, DOI, URL, or other identifying information where relevant;
3. a clear description of the concern and relevant chronology;
4. relevant supporting evidence, documents, correspondence, or links;
5. the requested remedy or outcome, where appropriate.

Complaints are handled confidentially. Access to personal information and case materials is limited to individuals who require the information for assessment or resolution. Confidentiality will be maintained to the greatest extent reasonably possible while allowing a fair investigation and compliance with legal, institutional, and ethical obligations.

Anonymous complaints may be considered when sufficiently specific and supported by credible evidence. However, anonymity may limit the journal's ability to seek clarification or communicate an outcome.

Jurnal Venus does not tolerate retaliation against individuals who raise concerns in good faith. Deliberately false, malicious, abusive, or knowingly misleading allegations may themselves be subject to appropriate editorial action.

The Editorial Office will acknowledge an identifiable complaint as soon as reasonably practicable and conduct an initial assessment of its relevance, completeness, urgency, seriousness, and whether it falls within the journal's authority.

Additional information may be requested. If the matter is primarily within the responsibility of a university, research institution, ethics committee, legal authority, or other competent body, the complainant may be informed that the issue should also or instead be referred to that organization.

Where a complaint requires further examination, the case will be reviewed by an editor or another appropriately appointed person who has no relevant conflict of interest. The assessment may include examination of submission records, OJS editorial history, reviewer assignments, review reports, author responses, published material, correspondence, metadata, or other relevant documentation.

Individuals whose actions are the subject of a complaint will normally be given a reasonable opportunity to respond. Where research misconduct may have occurred, Jurnal Venus may consult or refer the matter to the relevant institution, ethics committee, publisher, or other competent authority.

Similarity percentages, AI-detection scores, automated assessments, anonymous allegations, or suspicion alone are not treated as conclusive evidence of misconduct. Decisions must be supported by appropriate contextual assessment and evidence.

A person who is directly involved in the disputed matter or has a relevant competing interest must not investigate or decide the complaint or appeal.

• A complaint concerning a handling editor will be considered by another unconflicted editor or senior editorial representative.
• A complaint concerning the Editor-in-Chief will be referred to the publisher or another qualified and unconflicted authority designated for the case.
• If the publisher is directly implicated, an appropriately independent and unconflicted person may be appointed to review the matter.

After appropriate assessment, Jurnal Venus will communicate the outcome and a reasoned explanation to the complainant to the extent permitted by confidentiality, privacy, and other applicable obligations.

Depending on the case, an outcome may include clarification, acknowledgement of an error, apology, procedural improvement, reconsideration of an editorial decision, additional independent assessment, replacement of a compromised review, correction of metadata, referral to an institution, or post-publication action under the Corrections and Retractions Policy.

The journal seeks to resolve cases without unnecessary delay. Complex cases may require additional time when independent expertise, institutional findings, or further documentation are necessary. Where resolution is significantly delayed, the journal should provide a status update when reasonably practicable.

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when there are specific and substantive grounds for reconsideration. Appropriate grounds may include:

• a material factual error affecting the decision;
• a significant misunderstanding of the manuscript or reviewer response;
• a material procedural irregularity;
• a relevant undisclosed conflict of interest;
• significant new evidence directly relevant to the editorial decision.

Mere disagreement with reviewer criticism, dissatisfaction with a rejection, or a request for reconsideration without substantive evidence does not by itself justify an appeal.

The corresponding author should ordinarily submit the appeal on behalf of the author group to the Editorial Office using the subject line “Appeal – Jurnal Venus – [Manuscript ID]”.

The appeal should identify the editorial decision being challenged, provide a concise point-by-point explanation of the grounds for appeal, and include relevant supporting evidence. Submission of an appeal does not guarantee reconsideration, acceptance, or publication.

An appeal should be assessed by an editor or qualified adviser who was not responsible for the original decision and who has no relevant conflict of interest, whenever reasonably possible.

The appeal assessment may include review of the submission history, desk-review record, reviewer reports, author responses, correspondence, editorial decisions, and any material new evidence. Additional independent expert advice may be requested where necessary.

The appeal reviewer or adviser will provide a recommendation to the appropriate unconflicted editorial authority. Where the Editor-in-Chief is unconflicted, the Editor-in-Chief normally retains responsibility for the final journal decision.

The outcome of the appeal will be communicated in writing with a concise explanation of the basis for the decision.

Once the journal's internal appeal procedure has been completed, the resulting editorial decision will ordinarily be final. The matter may be reconsidered if significant new evidence, a previously unknown conflict of interest, or a material procedural failure subsequently becomes known.

Jurnal Venus maintains appropriate restricted records of complaints and appeals, including relevant correspondence, evidence, conflict-of-interest safeguards, editorial actions, and outcomes, in accordance with applicable privacy and record-retention requirements.

Where appropriate, the journal may use anonymized or aggregated information from complaints and appeals to improve editorial procedures. Confidential case files, personal data, manuscript identities, and sensitive investigative information will not be made public unless disclosure is required or appropriately justified.

This policy is periodically reviewed by the Jurnal Venus editorial board and may be updated to reflect experience in case handling, developments in publication ethics, applicable regulations, institutional requirements, and changes in journal procedures.