Notary Law Journal (NoLaJ) is a peer-reviewed journal published by Faculty of Law Lambung Mangkurat University. This journal is available in print and online and highly respects the publication ethic and avoids any type of plagiarism. This statement explains the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor in chief, the editorial board, the peer-reviewers­­­­­ and the publisher (Faculty of Law Lambung Mangkurat University). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication. The publication of an article in a peer-reviewed journal of NoLaJ 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.

Faculty of Law Lambung Mangkurat University as publisher of NoLaJ 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, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Faculty of Law Lambung Mangkurat University and Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
Publication decisions. The editor of the Notary Law Journal 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 co nfer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

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

1. Authors shall submit the manuscript via email in Microsoft Word 97-2003 format.
2. Authors must ensure the manuscript has been restructured following the submission guidelines provided by the editors before submitting the manuscript.
3. Authors must declare the originality of the manuscript in a written form provided by the editors.
4. Authors must ensure the manuscript is free from plagiarism. “Plagiarism” includes claiming another’s paper as author’s own paper, copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper without proper citation, or claiming results of research conducted by others.
5. Authors must ensure the manuscript has not been published in other publications.
6. Authors may publish the same manuscript in other publications with the editors’ consent.
7. Authors must agree to the transfer of license of the manuscript in a written form provided by the editors.
8. Authors must acknowledge and refer the sources, works, and words of other authors in the manuscript according to the submission guidelines provided by the editors.
9. Authors must fill out any administration forms provided by the editors.
10. Authors must revise and edit its manuscript once the first fast review has been conducted, and submit the revised manuscript within specified time frame.
11. Authors must revise and edit its manuscript based on the reviewers’ assessment, and submit the revised manuscript within a specified time frame.
12. Authors may resubmit the rejected manuscript after the manuscript has been revised. The revised manuscript will be assessed directly by the editors based on reviewers’ assessment.

Duties of Editors

1. Editors must first evaluate the manuscripts as soon as the manuscript is received as a first fast review.
2. Editors must evaluate manuscripts regardless of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political opinions of the authors.
3. Editors must keep the confidentiality of the manuscript authorship from reviewers in the publishing process.
4. Editors shall be guided with several criteria before deciding to publish the manuscript in an editorial board’s meeting.
5. Editors must promptly notify the authors with regards to their decisions in publishing the manuscript and the reasons If the manuscript is rejected.
6. Editors must disclose any conflict of interest in publishing the manuscript.
7. In any event a dispute with regards to the authorship is occurred, Editors must contact the corresponding author and the other authors to explain the veracity of the case and to take responsive measures in order to resolve the dispute.

Duties of Reviewers

1. Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts based on academic standard publication pursuant to their intellectual knowledge and submit the assessment within specified time frame.
2. Reviewers must present the result of the review in the assessment form provided by the editors.
3. Reviewers may also present the result of the review in the manuscript in addition to the review form.
4. Reviewers must keep all information contained in the manuscript as confidential and not to use the materials of the manuscript for reviewers’ own benefit.
5. Reviewers who feel unqualified to review the manuscript must promptly notify the editors and excuse himself from the review process.
6. Reviewers must willingly agree to fill out any administration forms provided by the editors.