Focus and Scope

ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum is a peer-reviewed academic journal that serves as a forum for the dissemination of scholarly works in the field of law. The journal publishes original and high-quality articles resulting from research, conceptual studies, critical analyses, and legal reflections that contribute to the development of legal science and practice at both national and international levels.

The journal focuses on legal studies in the areas of Business Law, International Law, Criminal Law, and Civil Law, addressing contemporary legal issues, regulatory developments, legal reform, and comparative and interdisciplinary perspectives. ARBITER welcomes manuscripts that demonstrate analytical depth, methodological rigor, and relevance to legal theory, policy, and practice.

All submitted manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review process and are reviewed by at least two independent reviewers to ensure originality, academic quality, and ethical compliance. The journal adheres to established standards of scholarly publishing and publication ethics.

ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum is published biannually, with issues scheduled in May and June, and is intended for academics, researchers, legal practitioners, and policy observers.

Section Policies

Articles

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum undergo a structured and rigorous editorial and peer-review process to ensure academic quality, relevance, and integrity.

1. Initial Editorial Review

Upon submission, each manuscript is subject to a preliminary review conducted by the Editor. This initial assessment evaluates the manuscript’s scope relevance, originality, academic quality, and compliance with the journal’s author guidelines. At this stage, the Editor may decide to:

• Proceed with the peer-review process, or

• Request minor revisions before the manuscript is sent to reviewers, or

• Reject the manuscript if it does not meet the journal’s focus and standards.

The initial editorial review typically takes approximately one week.

2. Peer Review Process

Manuscripts that pass the initial review are assigned to at least two independent reviewers through a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed. Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and academic competence relevant to the manuscript topic.

3. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Editor makes one of the following editorial decisions:

1. Accepted – the manuscript is accepted for publication without revision;

2. Revisions Required – the manuscript requires minor or major revisions;

3. Resubmit for Review – the revised manuscript must be resubmitted for further review;

4. Redirected – the manuscript is recommended to be submitted to another journal or publisher more appropriate to its scope;

5. Rejected – the manuscript is not accepted for publication.

4. Review Timeline

The average time required to receive the first editorial decision following peer review is approximately 6–8 weeks. The time needed to reach a final decision depends on the number of review rounds, the responsiveness of reviewers, and the timeliness of authors in submitting revisions. On average, the entire review process leading to a final decision takes 4–5 months.

Publication Frequency

ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum is published biannually, with issues scheduled in May and June, and is intended for academics, researchers, legal practitioners, and policy observers.

Open Access Policy

Open Access Policy

ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum is an open access journal, providing immediate and unrestricted access to all published content. This journal is committed to the principle that free and open access to scholarly research promotes the global exchange of knowledge, increases research visibility, and enhances academic impact.

All articles published in ARBITER are freely available to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, and link to the full texts without financial, legal, or technical barriers, in accordance with the journal’s open access policy.

Copyright and Licensing

Authors retain the copyright of their published work and grant ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum the right of first publication. All published articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original author(s) and the source are properly cited.

By adopting the CC BY license, ARBITER supports transparency, accessibility, and ethical dissemination of legal scholarship at the national and international levels.

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

Screening For Plagiarism

The manuscript that submitted into this journal will be screened for plagiarism usingPLAGIARISMA.NET

Publication Ethic and Malpractic Statement

ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum  is a Journal of Law Science. The published paper is the result of research, reflection, and actual critical study with respect to the themes of governmental, social, and political science. This following statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher (Universitas Medan Area).

Our ethic statements are based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Publication decisions
The editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published.
The editor 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 editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play
An 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 Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Promptness
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.

Confidentiality
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards
Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources
Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum

ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum  is a Journal of Law for information and communication resources for academics, and observers of Business Law, International law, Criminal law, and Civil law. The published paper is the result of research, reflection, and criticism with respect to the themes of Business Law, International law, Criminal law, and Civil law. All papers are peer-reviewed by at least two referees. Published twice a year (April and October) and first published for print edition in April 2019.

Review Guidlines

Review Process of Manuscript

A. Initial Review by Reviewer

Before accepting a review assignment, reviewers are expected to:

1. Assess Expertise and Availability
   Reviewers should read the manuscript abstract to ensure that the topic aligns with their area of expertise. Reviewers are encouraged to decline the review invitation if they lack sufficient expertise or have other valid reasons that may compromise the quality or timeliness of the review.

2. Understand Journal Requirements
   Reviewers should familiarize themselves with the journal’s guidelines for reviewers, including:
   a) The type of manuscript (e.g., original research, review article, conceptual paper, or technical note) and the journal’s expectations for each category;
   b) Journal requirements related to manuscript length, structure, citation style, and formatting.

3. Evaluate Scope and Relevance
   Reviewers should ensure that the manuscript aligns with the scope, focus, and mission of ARBITER: Jurnal Ilmiah Magister Hukum.

4. Preliminary Assessment of Manuscript Quality
   Reviewers should conduct an initial reading of the full manuscript to determine its overall suitability for publication, while noting only major issues if present. Key considerations include:
   a) Whether the research question or legal issue is significant, relevant, and original;
   b) Whether the research design, methodology, or legal analysis is appropriate and methodologically sound (for empirical or normative research);
   c) Whether the results, arguments, or legal findings are sufficiently substantial and not fundamentally flawed.

5. Initial Impression and Recommendation
   Based on the initial assessment, the manuscript may fall into one of the following categories:
   a) Acceptable with minor revisions – the manuscript is solid, original, methodologically sound, and well-presented, requiring only minor comments or clarifications;
   b) Reject – the manuscript contains fundamental flaws that cannot be remedied;
   c) Major revision or revise and resubmit – the manuscript has potential scholarly value but requires substantial revisions before it can be considered for publication.

B. Full Review Process of Manuscript

During the detailed review stage, reviewers are requested to evaluate the manuscript based on the following aspects:

1. Clarity and Organization

   • Is the manuscript logically structured and easy to follow?

   • Does it demonstrate a clear flow of argumentation and coherence between sections?

2. Writing Quality and Conciseness

   • Is the manuscript concise, clear, and comprehensible?

   • Are there sections that should be reduced, expanded, clarified, or omitted?

3. Language and Mechanics

   • Identify major issues related to grammar, punctuation, spelling, or sentence structure.

   • If language issues are minor, reviewers should note specific examples. If issues are systematic, reviewers should provide representative examples rather than editing the entire manuscript.

4. Use of Abbreviations

   • Abbreviations should be used sparingly and consistently, and clearly defined to avoid confusion for readers.

5. Compliance with Journal Style and Format

   • The manuscript should comply with the journal’s formatting guidelines, citation style, and submission requirements.

6. Citation and Referencing

   • Proper citations must be provided when referring to evidence-based information, legal authorities, statutes, case law, or scholarly sources from outside references.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Article Processing Charges

Article Publication: 1.000.000.00 (IDR)