DECLARATION OF GENERATIF AI

Generative Artificial Intelligence Policy

The rapid proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technologies has introduced significant efficiencies in academic writing and editorial processes. However, their use also raises substantive ethical, legal, and scholarly integrity concerns within scientific publishing. In recognition of these developments, the Indonesian Journal of Corruption and Criminal Justice (IJCCJ) has adopted a formal policy governing the use of GenAI tools throughout the stages of manuscript preparation, peer review, and publication. This policy is designed to safeguard intellectual accountability, ensure transparency, and preserve the integrity of scholarly communication.

International Publishing Standards

Although indexing platforms such as Scopus do not prescribe rigid formatting or uniform AI governance requirements, a number of leading academic publishers have articulated clear policies concerning the use of generative technologies. These emerging standards inform and contextualise IJCCJ’s own regulatory framework.

Elsevier, for example, requires authors to disclose any use of GenAI tools and permits such tools solely to enhance readability and language clarity under meaningful human supervision. It expressly prohibits listing artificial intelligence systems as authors and forbids their citation as scholarly sources.

Springer Nature similarly emphasises the principle of human accountability in scholarly production. It disallows AI-generated figures and requires disclosure where substantial use of GenAI tools has occurred, while recognising that routine language editing assisted by large language models does not necessitate formal documentation.

Other publishers, including BMC, the Nature Portfolio, and Cureus, have adopted comparable positions. These policies uniformly prohibit the attribution of authorship to AI systems, mandate transparent disclosure of AI-assisted content, and restrict the inclusion of unlabelled AI-generated material.

IJCCJ Policy Framework

Disclosure and Transparency

Authors submitting to IJCCJ are required to provide a clear and explicit statement disclosing any use of GenAI tools, such as ChatGPT in the preparation of their manuscript. This disclosure must appear in a dedicated statement placed at the end of the manuscript, immediately prior to the references. The requirement applies to all substantive uses of generative technologies across drafting, revision, and related preparatory stages.

Prohibition of AI Authorship

Under no circumstances may GenAI tools be listed as authors or co-authors of a manuscript. Authorship within IJCCJ is reserved exclusively for natural persons who meet recognised standards of scholarly contribution and accountability. Artificial intelligence systems lack legal personality, moral agency, and the capacity for intellectual responsibility; accordingly, they cannot fulfil the criteria for authorship.

Restrictions on AI-Generated Visual Materials

Figures, tables, diagrams, and other visual materials must not be generated solely by artificial intelligence tools unless expressly approved by the editorial board and clearly labelled as such. Authors remain responsible for verifying the accuracy, originality, and intellectual legitimacy of all visual content included in their submissions.

Permissible Use for Language and Stylistic Editing

The limited use of AI tools for minor language refinement, grammar correction, or stylistic improvement is permitted, provided that such use occurs under close and substantive human supervision. Authors retain full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of their work. The deployment of GenAI for editorial assistance does not diminish or transfer the author’s accountability for the content submitted.

Commitment to Academic Integrity

Through these measures, IJCCJ seeks to balance openness to technological innovation with a firm commitment to scholarly ethics and intellectual responsibility. The policy acknowledges the practical advantages offered by evolving digital tools while affirming that academic authorship, analytical reasoning, and normative judgment must remain fundamentally human enterprises.