ETHICS OF PUBLICATION
The statement of professional ethical codes delineates the ethical standards upheld by all participants in the publication process of this scientific journal, including Editors, Peer-reviewers, and Authors. The publication ethics of Repertoar journal align with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and the Ethical Codes of Scientific Publication as stipulated in Peraturan Kepala LIPI Nomor 5 Tahun 2014. The code of ethics fundamentally endorses three core concepts of ethics in publications, specifically:
Neutrality (absence of conflicts of interest in public administration), Justice (attributing authorship rights to the beneficiary as the Author), and Honesty (devoid of duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (DF2P) in publication).
Upon reviewing this Publication Ethics Statement, the Author (s) must download the Statement of Manuscript Authenticity and the Statement of Open Access. The signed Ethical Statement and Copyright Agreement must be submitted as additional files with the first article submission.

DUTIES OF EDITOR

Decisions Regarding Publication
The editor determines which submitted articles will be published in the journal. The editor is subject to the policies established by the journal's editorial board and must adhere to applicable legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor may consult with other editors or reviewers when making this decision.

Grievances and Requests for Review
Repertoar Journal will establish a protocol for addressing complaints about the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board, or Publisher. Complaints regarding a case will be addressed to the appropriate personnel. The scope of complaints encompasses issues about journal business processes, including the editorial process, citation manipulation, unfair practices by editors or reviewers, and peer-review manipulation. COPE guidelines will process complaint cases.

Equitable Conduct
An editor shall assess manuscripts based solely on their intellectual content, irrespective of the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.

Confidentiality is the ethical and legal duty to protect personal information from unauthorized access or disclosure. It is a fundamental principle in various fields, including healthcare, law, and research, ensuring that sensitive data is handled with care and respect for individual privacy.

The editor and editorial staff are prohibited from disclosing any information regarding a submitted manuscript to individuals other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the Publisher, as deemed appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished materials presented in a submitted manuscript may not be utilized in an editor's research without the author's explicit written permission.

DUTIES OF REVIEWERS

Role in Editorial Decision-Making
Peer review aids the editor in making editorial decisions and, through communication with the author, may also help the author enhance the paper.

Timeliness
Referees who believe they are unqualified to evaluate the research presented in a manuscript or recognize that a timely review is unfeasible should inform the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Confidentiality is the ethical principle and legal obligation to protect private information from unauthorized access or disclosure. Maintaining trust and integrity in professional relationships is essential in various fields, including healthcare, law, and research.

All manuscripts submitted for review shall be regarded as confidential documents. Disclosure or discussion with others is prohibited unless authorized by the editor.

Criteria for Objectivity
Reviews must be conducted with objectivity. Personal criticism of the author is deemed inappropriate. Referees must articulate their perspectives clearly, accompanied by supporting rationale.

Recognition of References
Reviewers must identify pertinent published research that the authors have not referenced. Any observation, derivation, or argument that has been previously reported must include the appropriate citation. A reviewer must inform the editor of any significant similarities or overlaps between the evaluated manuscript and any other published work of which they possess relevant personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Confidentiality of privileged information or ideas acquired through peer review must be maintained, and such information should not be utilized for personal gain. Reviewers must refrain from evaluating manuscripts if they have conflicts of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.

DUTIES OF AUTHOR

Standards for Reporting
Reports of original research must provide an accurate representation of the conducted work and an objective analysis of its significance. The manuscript must accurately represent the underlying data. A paper must include adequate detail and references to enable others to replicate the research. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements represent unethical conduct and are impermissible.

Originality and Plagiarism
Authors must guarantee that their works are entirely original. If they have utilized the work or words of others, proper citation or quotation is required.

Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication
Generally, an author should refrain from publishing manuscripts presenting the same research in multiple journals or primary publications. Concurrent submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals is considered an unethical publishing practice and is, therefore, unacceptable.

Recognition of Sources
It is essential to consistently provide proper acknowledgment of the contributions of others. Authors must reference publications that have significantly shaped the nature of the reported work.

Attribution of the Paper
Authorship must be restricted to individuals who have contributed substantially to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the study presented. Individuals who have made substantial contributions ought to be acknowledged as co-authors. Individuals contributing to specific substantive aspects of the research project should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

The corresponding author must verify that all suitable co-authors are included in the manuscript, excluding inappropriate co-authors. Furthermore, all co-authors should have reviewed and approved the final version of the paper and consented to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Authors must disclose any financial or substantive conflicts of interest in their manuscript that could be perceived as influencing the results or interpretation of their work. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed.

Critical Flaws in Published Research
Upon discovering a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, an author must promptly inform the journal editor or publisher and collaborate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Ethical Oversight
The manuscript must identify any unusual hazards associated with the use of chemicals, humans, animals, procedures, or equipment in the research to adhere to ethical standards in research involving animals and human subjects. Authors must obtain legal, ethical clearance from an appropriate association or legal organization if required.

In cases where the research involves confidential data related to business or marketing practices, authors must provide a clear justification regarding the secure handling of such data or information.

CLAIMS OF RESEARCH MISCONDUCT

Research misconduct encompasses fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, and plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research, as well as in writing articles and reporting research results. Editors are responsible for maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record when authors are implicated in research misconduct or other significant irregularities related to published articles in scientific journals.

Repertoar journal includes a Comments and Criticism section that serves as a platform for articulating diverse perspectives, offering comments, clarifying misunderstandings, correcting errors, and reporting instances of research misconduct related to published papers. The journal's readership is encouraged to contribute to this forum.

In instances of alleged misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will adhere to COPE's best practices to effectively resolve the complaint and address the misconduct equitably. The editors will investigate the allegation. A manuscript identified as containing misconduct will be rejected. A retraction may be issued and associated with the original article when a published paper is identified as containing misconduct.

WITHDRAWAL OF MANUSCRIPTS

Policy Regarding Article Withdrawal
The journal editor holds exclusive and independent authority in determining the publication of submitted articles. The Editor's decision is informed by the policies established by the journal's editorial board and is subject to legal obligations about libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. This principle underscores the significance of the scholarly archive as a permanent historical record of scholarly transactions. Published articles shall remain intact, precise, and unmodified to the greatest extent feasible. Occasionally, circumstances may necessitate the retraction or removal of a published article. Such actions should not be taken casually and may only be justified in exceptional circumstances. Furthermore, authors and/or their institutions will face penalties for any article withdrawal, including a temporary or permanent ban on article submissions.

This policy addresses these concerns while incorporating current best practices within the scholarly and library communities. As standards evolve, this issue will be revisited, and input from academic and library communities will be welcomed. These issues necessitate the establishment of international standards. All Article Withdrawal Policies in Repertoar Journal, including those about the Withdrawal of Manuscripts, Article in Press, Article Retraction, Article Removal, and Article Replacement, are derived from the Elsevier Article Withdrawal Policy.

Withdrawal of Article by Author(s)
Authors are prohibited from withdrawing an article submitted to Repertoar journal, as such actions deplete the resources, time, and effort invested by the Editor and peer reviewers in the article's processing. Suppose the author continues to request the withdrawal of the article. In that case, they will face a penalty consisting of a ban on manuscript submissions for a maximum of eight instances (equivalent to four volumes or four years) due to the withdrawal during the review process. Withdrawing a manuscript from one journal after another has been accepted is considered highly unethical.

The retraction of an article post-acceptance for publication is highly unethical. The author will face a penalty consisting of a ban on manuscript submissions for a maximum of 20 instances, equivalent to 10 volumes or 10 years. The withdrawal of the manuscript under this policy pertains to submitting article revisions that surpass the time limit set by the Editor and failing to notify the Editor and/or revise the manuscript promptly. If the author fails to revise the manuscript by the deadline without confirmation, they may face a ban of up to 12 instances (6 volumes or 6 years).

Authors who withdraw multiple manuscripts may face permanent bans. This prohibition may extend to the author's institution. The Repertoar Journal Editorial Board may publicly announce via the Repertoar journal page and/or share information with other journal editors or publishers during the banning processes in these instances.

RETRACTION OF ARTICLE

Infringements of professional ethical codes, including multiple submissions, false claims of authorship, plagiarism, and fraudulent data use, are prohibited in Repertoar Journal. A retraction may be employed to rectify errors in submission or publication. The retraction of an article by its authors or the Editor, based on the counsel of the scholarly community, has historically been a periodic occurrence in academia. Various library and academic organizations have established standards for handling retractions, and Repertoar Journal adopts this best practice for article retraction.

The Editor will thoroughly investigate the violations of professional ethical codes. The Repertoar Journal Editorial Board will inform the Author (s) of the alleged infringement, provide supporting evidence, and present the available options for the Author (s) to consider. Should the Editor be unable to reach the Author within the designated timeframe, the Editor will consult with another Editor and the Editorial Advisory Board regarding this issue.

The criteria for article retraction in Repertoar Journal are as follows:
The Repertoar Journal Editorial Member will issue a retraction statement in Indonesian and English titled "Retracted: (article title). "
The retraction letter for this article, including evidence, comments, criticism, or requests from scientific community members, is located on the preceding page. It shares the same page number as the article's first page and is assigned the additional code "ed-1" for the letter's first page, followed by subsequent pages (e.g., 56-ed-1, 56-ed-2, etc.).
The original version of the article will receive a "Retracted" watermark or stamp and be positioned after the letter. This new PDF file replaces the original PDF file article.
The article's abstract on the Repertoar Journal website has been replaced with a statement indicating its retraction due to violations of ethical codes and/or Repertoar Journal policy. In contrast, the article's keyword has been removed.
The retraction letter for the article will be published in Virtuoso in the edition that includes both the article and the letter in the Comments and Criticism section.

REMOVAL OF ARTICLES: LEGAL CONSTRAINTS

In rare instances, an article must be withheld from the online database. This will occur only in cases where the article is defamatory, infringes upon others' legal rights, is anticipated to be the subject of a court order, or poses a significant health risk if acted upon. Under these conditions, the metadata (Title and Authors) will be preserved, while the text will be substituted with a notification indicating that the article has been removed for legal reasons.

REPLACEMENT OF ARTICLE

If the article presents a significant health risk if implemented, the authors of the original article may consider retracting the erroneous version and providing a corrected one. Under these circumstances, the retraction procedures will be implemented, with the distinction that the database retraction notice will include a link to the corrected, re-published article and a history of the document.