Appeal and Complaint Process

JKCD Complaints & Appeals Policy

JKCD is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics, integrity, and transparency. The journal welcomes all legitimate concerns related to ethical misconduct, editorial processes, and editorial decisions. Any individual—including authors, reviewers, readers, or external parties—may submit a complaint, allegation of misconduct, or appeal.

3.1 How to Submit a Complaint or Appeal

All complaints and appeals must be submitted in writing to:
managingeditor@journalofkcd.com

Complaints may involve:

  • Alleged misconduct by authors, reviewers, editors, or editorial board members
  • Ethical concerns such as plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, and unethical research conduct
  • Concerns about peer review quality, timeliness, or transparency
  • Suspected breaches of journal policy or COPE guidelines

Appeals may involve:

  • Rejection decisions believed to be based on factual error or oversight
  • Concerns regarding reviewer bias, inappropriate comments, or inadequate assessment
  • Procedural irregularities during editorial or peer review
  • Requests for reconsideration based on new, relevant clarification or evidence

Anonymous complaints are permitted; however, the journal encourages transparent communication to aid a thorough review.

3.2 Initial Screening (Complaints & Appeals)

Upon receiving a submission, the Managing Editor conducts an initial assessment to determine:

  • The credibility and seriousness of the concern
  • Whether adequate information is provided
  • Whether the matter constitutes a complaint (misconduct/ethical concern) or an appeal (editorial decision)
  • Whether further investigation or review is warranted

Routing after Screening

  • Complaints → forwarded to the Complaints Process Committee
  • Appeals → forwarded directly to the Editor-in-Chief

3.3 Complaint Investigation Process

All complaints are reviewed by the Complaints Process Committee following:

  • COPE Core Practices
  • COPE Flowcharts
  • COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Review
  • Principles of Transparency and Best Practice
  • WAME Best Practice Guidelines
  • Council of Science Editors (CSE) Standards
  • HEC Pakistan Policies

The Committee reviews the evidence, seeks expert advice if needed, and prepares findings and recommendations for the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board makes the final decision.

3.4 Appeal Review Process 

JKCD permits authors to appeal editorial decisions in accordance with COPE’s Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing.

1. Right to Appeal

Authors may appeal decisions if they believe:

  • There was a factual error in the review
  • Reviewer comments contain bias or unjustified criticism
  • There were procedural errors or administrative oversights

Appeals must be based on substantive academic or procedural grounds.

2. Independent Handling

All appeals are evaluated exclusively by the Editor-in-Chief, who:

  • Was not involved in the original decision
  • Ensures an impartial, unbiased, and independent evaluation
  • Excludes all editors, reviewers, and staff involved in the initial decision from the appeal review

3. Appeal Evaluation Steps

In accordance with COPE recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief will:

  • Reassess the complete editorial record (reviewer reports, decision letters, correspondence)
  • Evaluate the author’s grounds for appeal
  • Assess whether peer review was fair, objective, and free from conflict of interest
  • Request additional expert or statistical review, ensuring new reviewers are blinded to prior decisions
  • Document all steps for transparency and accountability

4. Possible Outcomes

The Editor-in-Chief may issue one of the following COPE-compliant outcomes:

  • Decision Upheld: Original editorial decision stands
  • Decision Revised: Additional review or reassessment is undertaken
  • Decision Reversed: Manuscript is reinstated for further review or potential acceptance

The Editor-in-Chief’s decision is final.

5. No Penalty for Appeals

Authors acting in good faith are not penalized for submitting an appeal.

6. Documentation

All appeal materials and decisions are formally documented and stored to ensure transparency and COPE audit-readiness.

3.5 Complaints Process Committee

Complaints are evaluated by the senior editorial committee:

  • Professor Dr. Samreena Mohammad
  • Professor Dr. Muslim Khan

This committee handles complaints only; appeals are handled exclusively by the Editor-in-Chief.

3.6 Consequences of Misconduct

Depending on the investigation outcomes, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

  • Correction or Retraction of the article
  • Formal Warning to authors, reviewers, or editors
  • Submission Ban (temporary or permanent) for severe violations
  • Notification of Institutional Authorities for grave misconduct
  • Withdrawal of reviewer/editor privileges, if applicable

All actions follow COPE guidance on appropriate responses to misconduct.

3.7 Ethical Handling of Complaints & Appeals

JKCD ensures:

  • Fairness: Equal opportunity for all involved parties to respond
  • Confidentiality: All concerns and documents remain confidential
  • Impartiality: No conflicts of interest in handling complaints or appeals
  • Collaboration: Engagement with institutions, regulators, or publishers when required
  • Transparency: Documentation of all decisions and processes for COPE compliance

3.8 Compliance With COPE Standards

JKCD maintains full adherence to:

  • COPE Core Practices
  • COPE Flowcharts for misconduct investigations
  • COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Review
  • Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing

This policy ensures JKCD meets the International ethical and procedural standards.