Manuscript Types
Overview
Al-Adalah: Jurnal Hukum dan Politik Islam accepts three manuscript types: Original Research Article, Conceptual Article, and Review Article. Each manuscript must fit the journal's Focus and Scope and must demonstrate a clear scholarly problem, appropriate analytical or methodological approach, engagement with relevant scholarship, and a meaningful contribution.
1. Original Research Article
Definition
An Original Research Article presents original research findings, analysis, or arguments derived from a clearly defined research problem and an appropriate research design or analytical approach. The article may employ doctrinal/normative, socio-legal, empirical, comparative, or interdisciplinary approaches where appropriate to the research question.
Expected Contribution
- Develops an original finding, interpretation, argument, or legal analysis.
- Engages critically with relevant and current scholarship and identifies the problem or gap addressed by the research.
- Explains the method or analytical framework sufficiently for readers to understand how the findings or argument were developed.
- Supports claims with appropriate legal authorities, scholarly sources, empirical evidence, or other relevant research materials.
- Draws conclusions that follow from the analysis and states the contribution to legal scholarship.
Minimum Structural Logic
Title → Abstract → Keywords → Introduction/Research Background → Research Question(s) or Objective(s) → Literature/State of the Art and Research Gap, where appropriate → Method or Analytical Approach → Findings/Analysis → Discussion → Conclusion → References.
Not Appropriate as an Original Research Article
Manuscripts that merely describe legislation, institutions, cases, or events without an original research problem, analysis, evidence, or scholarly contribution should not be classified as Original Research Articles.
2. Conceptual Article
Definition
A Conceptual Article develops a substantial legal, constitutional, political, theoretical, or interdisciplinary argument without requiring the article to present original empirical data. A conceptual article must nevertheless be research-based, analytically rigorous, and grounded in relevant scholarship and legal authorities.
Expected Contribution
- Develops, critiques, refines, or reconstructs a concept, theory, legal doctrine, analytical framework, or normative argument.
- Identifies a clear conceptual or theoretical problem rather than merely presenting general opinion.
- Engages critically with relevant scholarly literature and, where applicable, legislation, jurisprudence, policy documents, or other authoritative sources.
- Demonstrates a coherent line of reasoning from the problem to the proposed argument or conceptual contribution.
- Explains the significance of the argument for legal scholarship or the understanding of a broader legal or socio-legal issue.
Minimum Structural Logic
Title → Abstract → Keywords → Introduction/Problem → State of the Art or Conceptual Context → Conceptual/Theoretical Framework → Main Argument and Analysis → Implications/Contribution → Conclusion → References.
Not Appropriate as a Conceptual Article
Pure opinion pieces, advocacy statements, policy commentary without scholarly analysis, or essays lacking sustained engagement with legal scholarship should not be classified as Conceptual Articles.
3. Review Article
Definition
A Review Article provides a rigorous and analytical synthesis of a defined body of scholarship, legal developments, jurisprudence, or research literature. It must do more than summarize previous publications; it should identify patterns, debates, disagreements, limitations, developments, or research gaps and provide a substantive analytical synthesis.
Expected Contribution
- Defines a clear review question, theme, body of literature, legal development, or jurisprudential field.
- Explains the basis for selecting and analyzing the reviewed material.
- Provides a critical rather than merely descriptive synthesis.
- Identifies significant patterns, debates, contradictions, limitations, or gaps in the existing scholarship or legal development.
- Shows how the review advances understanding of the field and identifies implications for future research, legal analysis, or policy where appropriate.
Minimum Structural Logic
Title → Abstract → Keywords → Introduction/Review Problem → Review Question(s) and Scope → Review Approach/Selection Criteria → Analytical Synthesis → Critical Discussion → Research Gaps/Implications → Conclusion → References.
Review Transparency
Where a Review Article claims systematic, scoping, bibliometric, or otherwise structured review procedures, the article must describe the search, selection, inclusion/exclusion, and analytical procedures sufficiently to allow readers to understand and assess the review process.
Cross-Type Requirements
- All manuscript types must fall within the journal's Focus and Scope.
- All manuscripts must present a clear scholarly problem or purpose and a meaningful contribution.
- All manuscripts must engage relevant scholarship and use reliable sources appropriate to the argument.
- Research claims must be supported by appropriate evidence, legal authorities, data, or analytical reasoning.
- Manuscripts involving human participants or other ethically sensitive research must comply with applicable research-ethics requirements.
- Authors must comply with the journal's requirements on originality, authorship, conflicts of interest, data, AI-assisted tools, and research integrity.
- All manuscripts are subject to initial editorial screening and, when suitable, external peer review.
Classification and Editorial Discretion
Authors should select the manuscript type that best represents the principal scholarly purpose and structure of the submission. The editors may request reclassification where the submitted manuscript type does not correspond to the manuscript's actual content, research design, or analytical character. Reclassification does not guarantee acceptance or peer review.
Relationship to Editorial Screening
Manuscript type is assessed together with scope, scholarly contribution, methodological or analytical adequacy, evidence or source reliability, and overall readiness for peer review. A manuscript may be returned for clarification or reclassification before external review.
Related Policies
- Focus and Scope
- Author Guidelines
- Editorial Screening and Desk-Rejection Policy
- Peer Review Process and Reviewer Criteria
- Publication Ethics & Research Integrity Policy
- Authorship and CRediT Policy
