Generative AI Policy

Journal of Transformative Islamic Law

Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies Policy

 

Promoting responsible innovation while protecting scholarly integrity, confidentiality, transparency, and human accountability.

Scope and Purpose

This policy governs the use of generative artificial intelligence and AI-assisted technologies in the preparation, submission, peer review, editorial evaluation, and publication of manuscripts in the Journal of Transformative Islamic Law (JTIL). It is intended to support appropriate technological assistance while ensuring that scholarly judgment, originality, confidentiality, ethical responsibility, and accountability remain human responsibilities.

Principle
Human Accountability
Principle
Transparency
Principle
Confidentiality
Principle
Research Integrity
1. Policy for Authors
Permitted assistance, disclosure, authorship, and prohibited uses
Permitted Use Authors may use generative AI tools to improve language clarity, grammar, style, structure, or readability, provided that all output is carefully reviewed, verified, and substantially controlled by the authors. AI assistance must not replace the authors’ scholarly judgment, legal reasoning, interpretation, or responsibility for the manuscript.
Disclosure Required Any material use of generative AI in manuscript preparation must be disclosed transparently. The declaration should identify the tool or service used, explain its purpose, and confirm that the authors reviewed the output and accept full responsibility for the final manuscript.
Authorship Restrictions Generative AI tools must not be listed as authors or co-authors. Authorship requires accountability, approval of the final work, disclosure of conflicts, and responsibility for research integrity—obligations that can only be fulfilled by human contributors.
Accuracy and Verification Authors must independently verify all AI-assisted text, quotations, legal authorities, case references, data, translations, citations, and bibliographic information. Fabricated or inaccurate references generated by AI remain the responsibility of the authors.
Prohibited Uses Authors must not use AI to fabricate data, invent sources, manipulate findings, conceal plagiarism, create misleading legal analysis, or generate images, figures, or graphical materials without disclosure and methodological justification. AI-generated or AI-altered visual content is permitted only when it forms an integral part of the research method and is described in sufficient detail for evaluation and reproducibility.
Suggested Disclosure Statement
During the preparation of this work, the author(s) used [NAME OF TOOL OR SERVICE] for [PURPOSE OF USE]. The author(s) reviewed, verified, and edited the AI-assisted output and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and final content of the manuscript.
2. Policy for Reviewers
Confidentiality and independent human assessment
Confidentiality
Reviewers must not upload any part of a submitted manuscript, supplementary file, confidential data, or reviewer report into a generative AI system. Doing so may violate confidentiality, privacy, copyright, and intellectual-property obligations.
Assessment Responsibility
Reviewers must not rely on generative AI to evaluate scholarly quality, originality, methodology, legal reasoning, or publication suitability. Peer review requires independent human expertise, critical analysis, and professional judgment. Reviewers remain fully responsible for every comment and recommendation submitted to the journal.
3. Policy for Editors
Protection of submissions and editorial independence
Confidentiality Protection Editors must not upload submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, author correspondence, editorial notes, or decision letters into generative AI tools. Confidential editorial materials must remain within authorized journal systems.
Editorial Decision-Making Generative AI must not be used to make or substantially determine editorial decisions. Decisions regarding review, revision, acceptance, rejection, correction, or retraction must remain under accountable human editorial judgment.
Suspected Misuse When undisclosed, deceptive, or unethical AI use is suspected, editors may request clarification, supporting records, revised disclosures, or other evidence. Confirmed violations may result in rejection, correction, retraction, or other action under the journal’s publication-ethics policies.
4. AI as a Research Method

AI tools may be used as part of a research method, including data analysis, coding, text classification, translation analysis, or other specialized procedures, when the use is methodologically justified and transparently reported. Authors must identify the tool, version, provider, purpose, inputs, relevant settings, validation process, limitations, and human oversight to the extent necessary for evaluation and reproducibility.

Routine Tools Generally Excluded

Ordinary spelling checkers, basic grammar tools, formatting tools, plagiarism-detection systems, and reference-management applications such as Zotero, Mendeley, and EndNote generally do not require disclosure when they do not generate substantive scholarly content. However, disclosure is required when a tool materially generates, rewrites, interprets, analyzes, or transforms the manuscript’s intellectual content.

5. Policy Summary
Role Permitted Use Disclosure Prohibited Use
Authors Language and readability assistance under human oversight; disclosed research-method use. Required for material generative or analytical use. AI authorship, fabricated sources or data, undisclosed substantive generation, deceptive manipulation.
Reviewers No use involving confidential manuscript content. Not applicable. Uploading manuscripts or reports; delegating scholarly assessment to AI.
Editors No use involving confidential submissions or editorial correspondence. Not applicable. Uploading confidential material; AI-driven editorial decisions or evaluations.
Human Responsibility Remains Final

Generative AI may assist certain limited tasks, but it cannot assume responsibility for authorship, peer review, editorial judgment, legal accuracy, ethical compliance, or the integrity of the scholarly record. Human authors, reviewers, and editors remain fully accountable for all work submitted, reviewed, decided, and published by JTIL.