1. Introduction and Scope

Iraqi Journal of Agricultural Research (IJAR) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity, publication ethics, and transparency. In alignment with the Core Practices and guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), this policy outlines a clear, fair, and objective procedure for handling grievances.

This policy applies to complaints submitted by authors, reviewers, readers, or any external parties regarding the IJAR’s operations, editorial conduct, or the integrity of published research.

The IJAR strictly distinguishes between two separate processing pathways:

· Complaints: Grievances regarding editorial or administrative misconduct, processing delays, or post-publication ethical concerns (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, or citation manipulation).

· Appeals: Requests by authors to reconsider a specific editorial decision, such as the rejection of a submitted manuscript.

2. Core Principles

The Editorial Board adheres to the following core principles when managing and investigating all complaints and appeals:

· Confidentiality: All investigations are conducted with strict confidentiality to protect the privacy of all parties involved, including the complainant and the respondent.

· Impartiality & Independence: All matters are evaluated objectively. If a complaint involves the Editor-in-Chief or a managing editor, the case will be escalated to an independent third party, the publisher, or an external advisory committee to prevent any real or perceived conflict of interest.

· Promptness: The journal treats every grievance seriously and aims to resolve issues within specified, reasonable timelines without unnecessary delays.

· Professionalism: All correspondence between the IJAR staff and the parties involved will maintain a neutral, courteous, and professional tone always.

 

3. Submission Guidelines

· Complaints or appeal requests must be submitted formally in writing via the journal’s official email: [[email protected]].

· Submission Requirements: The submission must include comprehensive details (e.g., manuscript ID, article title, name of the respondent, and a precise description of the issue) backed by specific, verifiable evidence.

· The IJAR will not investigate vague, continuous, or generalized allegations that lack factual support, nor will it tolerate intentionally malicious or abusive correspondence. Anonymous complaints will only be considered if they present significant, verifiable evidence of research misconduct.

 

4. Complaints Procedure

Upon receiving a formal complaint, the IJAR implements the following step-by-step procedure:

A. Acknowledgment: Receipt of the complaint will be acknowledged within [5] working days, providing the complainant with an estimated timeframe for the initial review.

B. Initial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief (or a designated independent editor) will assess the complaint to determine its validity, relevance, and the sufficiency of the provided evidence.

C. Formal Investigation: If the complaint is deemed valid, the Editorial Board will initiate an investigation, utilizing the relevant COPE Flowcharts as an operational framework. The accused party (author, reviewer, or staff member) will be formally notified and given a fair right of reply to present their defense.

D. Resolution and Corrective Action: Based on the investigation findings, the Editor-in-Chief will make a final determination. Corrective actions may include:

· Dismissing the complaint if allegations are proven groundless.

· Issuing a formal correction (Erratum/Corrigendum) for published articles.

· Publishing an official Expression of Concern.

· Executing a full article retraction in accordance with COPE Retraction Guidelines.

1. Closing the Case: The outcome and rationale will be formally communicated to the complainant. If a complainant continues to submit the same grievance without presenting new evidence, the journal reserves the right to declare the matter closed and cease further correspondence.

 

5. Appeals Procedure

Authors have the right to appeal an editorial rejection exactly once per manuscript under the following conditions:

· The appeal must be submitted within [15] days of receiving the rejection decision.

· The appeal must be grounded in strong academic arguments, providing a detailed, point-by-point rebuttal to the reviewers’ or editors’ comments, or demonstrating a clear, overlooked conflict of interest by a reviewer.

· Disagreements with the purely subjective academic opinion of peer reviewers or editors do not constitute sufficient grounds for an appeal.

· The Editor-in-Chief will refer the case to an independent editor or a new external reviewer (utilizing a double-blind review process) for an unbiased secondary evaluation.

· Finality: The editorial decision made following the appeal review is definitive and absolute; subsequent appeals for the same manuscript will not be considered.

 

6. Escalation Pathway

If a complainant or appellant remains unsatisfied with the final resolution provided by the IJAR’s editorial office, the matter may be escalated externally:

1. Institutional Escalation: The issue can be raised to the journal’s governing body or publisher: [Ministry of Agriculture / [email protected] ].

2. COPE Escalation: If the journal is a member of COPE and internal channels have been fully exhausted without a resolution, the complainant may refer the matter to COPE, provided it meets COPE's criteria and timelines for handling complaints against member journals.