Complaints and Appeals Policy

Bineka (Bisnis Ekonomi Akuntansi) is committed to handling complaints and appeals in a fair, transparent, respectful, and timely manner. The journal recognizes the right of authors, reviewers, readers, and other stakeholders to raise concerns about editorial decisions, editorial processes, publication ethics, or the conduct of parties involved in the journal’s publication workflow.

This policy distinguishes between an appeal, which is a formal request for reconsideration of an editorial decision, and a complaint, which is an expression of concern regarding the journal’s editorial management, ethical standards, delays, communication, or professional conduct. Both will be reviewed objectively and, where relevant, in accordance with recognized principles of publication ethics, including guidance associated with COPE-based practices.

1. Appeals against editorial decisions

Authors may submit an appeal if they believe that an editorial decision on their manuscript, such as rejection, request for major revision, or other significant editorial outcome, was based on a factual misunderstanding, procedural irregularity, reviewer error, potential bias, or other substantial concern. Appeals should not be used simply because the author disagrees with an unfavorable decision; they must be supported by clear reasons and relevant evidence.

An appeal must be submitted in writing to the editorial office by the corresponding author. The appeal should include the manuscript title, manuscript ID if available, the editorial decision being challenged, a detailed explanation of the grounds for appeal, and any supporting documents or evidence that may assist the journal in reassessing the case.

Upon receiving an appeal, the editorial office will acknowledge receipt and may conduct an initial screening to determine whether the appeal falls within the scope of this policy. Appeals that are incomplete, abusive, repetitive without new grounds, or unsupported by adequate explanation may be declined at the preliminary stage.

Where an appeal is accepted for review, the case may be reassessed by the Editor-in-Chief, another editor who was not involved in the original decision, or members of the editorial board, depending on the nature of the issue. The journal may also seek additional independent reviewer input when necessary to ensure a fair and technically sound reconsideration.

The outcome of an appeal may include confirmation of the original decision, reopening of editorial assessment, invitation to revise and resubmit, reassignment to a different editor or reviewer, or another appropriate editorial action. In general, the journal will consider one formal appeal per manuscript, and the decision following the appeal review will normally be regarded as final.

Authors should not submit the same manuscript elsewhere while an appeal is under consideration by the journal. An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision, and the journal reserves the right to prioritize active new submissions over appeal reviews in its editorial workload management.

2. Complaints about editorial process or conduct

A complaint may be submitted by authors, reviewers, readers, or other stakeholders regarding issues such as excessive delay in handling a manuscript, lack of communication, concerns about peer review quality, suspected reviewer or editorial bias, inappropriate behavior, breach of confidentiality, authorship disputes, ethical concerns, or deviations from the journal’s stated policies and procedures.

All complaints should be submitted in writing to the official editorial contact of the journal. The complainant should provide sufficient information, including the title of the manuscript or article if applicable, manuscript ID when available, date of relevant events, a clear description of the issue, and supporting evidence or documents wherever possible.

The editorial office will acknowledge receipt of the complaint and conduct an initial assessment to determine the nature and seriousness of the matter. Complaints relating to processing delays or communication issues may be handled administratively, while allegations involving ethics, bias, misconduct, or breach of procedure may require formal review by the Editor-in-Chief or editorial board.

Where necessary, the journal may consult relevant editors, reviewers, authors, editorial board members, or affiliated institutions to clarify the matter. The journal will seek to ensure that any investigation is proportionate, evidence-based, and conducted in a way that protects fairness for all parties involved.

3. Ethical complaints and misconduct concerns

Complaints involving suspected plagiarism, redundant publication, data fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, peer-review manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other forms of publication misconduct will be handled with particular care. In such cases, the journal may initiate a formal ethical review, request clarification from the relevant parties, and, when appropriate, consult institutional authorities or apply other policies such as the journal’s Retraction and Correction Policy.

The journal may also receive complaints from anonymous or confidential sources. Anonymous complaints will be considered to the extent that they provide sufficiently specific, credible, and verifiable information, and the journal will make reasonable efforts to protect the identity of complainants where confidentiality is appropriate.

4. Impartiality and conflict management

Complaints and appeals will be handled, as far as possible, by editorial personnel who were not directly involved in the original decision or disputed conduct. If the complaint or appeal concerns the Editor-in-Chief or presents a significant conflict of interest, the matter may be referred to another senior editor, editorial board member, publisher representative, or relevant institutional authority for independent consideration.

The journal will not tolerate abusive, threatening, defamatory, or harassing language in appeals or complaints. While concerns may still be reviewed on their merits, the journal reserves the right to limit further correspondence when communications become repetitive, bad-faith, or inappropriate in tone or conduct.

5. Outcomes and communication

After review, the journal may take actions such as explaining the editorial decision, correcting procedural error, obtaining further review, revising an editorial decision, issuing a correction, referring the matter for ethical investigation, closing the case for lack of evidence, or taking another proportionate action. The complainant or appellant will be informed of the outcome to the extent appropriate and consistent with confidentiality obligations.

The journal will aim to handle complaints and appeals as promptly as possible, but the time needed may vary depending on the complexity of the case, the availability of evidence, and the need to consult external parties. Where delays occur, the journal may provide an update indicating that the matter remains under review.

6. Confidentiality

All complaints, appeals, related correspondence, and investigative materials will be treated confidentially to the extent reasonably possible. Information will be shared only with individuals who need access in order to review, investigate, or resolve the matter appropriately, subject to the journal’s ethical responsibilities and any applicable institutional or legal requirements.

7. Final principles

This policy is intended to promote trust in the editorial process and to provide a clear route for the responsible handling of disagreements and concerns. Bineka will assess each complaint and appeal on its merits and will act in a manner consistent with fairness, editorial independence, academic integrity, and responsible scholarly publishing practice.