The publication ethics Muta'allim: Jurnal Pendidikan Agama Islam refer to the Regulation of the Head of LIPI Number 5 of 2014 concerning the Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications, which is based on COPE. The Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications essentially upholds three ethical values in publication, namely: (1) neutrality, meaning free from conflicts of interest in publication management; (2) fairness, meaning giving authorship rights to those who deserve to be authors; and (3) honesty, meaning free from duplication, fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism (DF2P) in publication. By adhering to these three ethical values, this Code of Ethics for Scientific Publications can guide journal managers, editors, reviewers, authors, and sponsors/third parties in the journal publication system to consistently comply with the code of ethics, follow standards, and take responsibility for good practices in scientific publication management as will be explained in detail in the following subsections:

Code of Ethics for Journal Managersl

1. Journal managers determine the journal's name, scope of knowledge, periodicity, and accreditation.
2. Journal managers establish the membership of the editorial board.
3. Journal managers define relationships between publishers, editors, reviewers, and other parties in a contract.
4. Respect the confidentiality of contributors, authors, editors, and reviewers.
5. Apply norms and rules regarding intellectual property rights, particularly copyright.
6. Review journal policies and present them to authors, editorial board members, reviewers, and readers.
7. Create a code of conduct for editors and reviewers.
8. Ensure regular journal publication according to the predetermined timeline.
9. Ensure the availability of resources for continuous journal publication.
10. Build partnerships and marketing strategies.
11. Prepare licenses and other legal aspects.

Code of Ethics for Editors

1. Address the needs of readers and authors.
2. Continuously improve the quality of publications.
3. Implement and prioritize processes to ensure the quality of manuscripts to be published.
4. Prioritize freedom of expression objectively.
5. Maintain the integrity and academic records of authors.
6. Provide corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when necessary.
7. Responsible for the style and format of manuscripts, while the content and all statements remain the responsibility of the authors.
8. Actively seek feedback from authors, readers, reviewers, and editorial board members to improve publication quality.
9. Reevaluate journals if they do not meet the standards of Scientific Publication.
10. Support initiatives to reduce research and publication errors.
11. Evaluate the effects of publication policies on authors and reviewers and make improvements as part of accountability and reducing mistakes.

 Code of Ethics for Reviewers

1. Accept assignments from the editorial team to review articles and submit review results to the editorial team to determine the article's eligibility for publication.
2. Review articles on time according to style guidelines based on scientific principles (data collection methods, authors' legality, conclusions, etc.).
3. Re-review corrected articles according to standards.
4. Encourage authors to improve their articles by providing feedback, suggestions, and recommendations.
5. Maintain the privacy of authors by not disclosing corrections, suggestions, and recommendations.
6. Reviewers should not review articles that directly or indirectly involve them in their work.
7. Follow peer review guidelines in reviewing articles and evaluating the review forms provided by the editor.
8. Review articles substantively without correcting grammar, punctuation, and typographical errors.
9. Ensure the principles of truth, novelty, and originality; prioritize the benefits of written works for the development of science, technology, and innovation; and understand its impact on the development of scientific writing.
10. Avoid maintaining personal opinions, author bias, or third-party influence that may affect decision-making objectivity.
11. Uphold objectivity and remain free from any influence.
12. Ensure the confidentiality of findings in the article until publication.
13. Possess extensive expertise and the ability to review articles accurately and correctly.
14. Decline to review research outside their field of expertise.
15. Maintain an open mind in accepting new opinions or perspectives that differ from their own.
16. Decline to conduct reviews if the deadline given by the editor cannot be met. If so, reviewers should notify the editor as early as possible.
17. Reject the final recommendation when there is a serious indication of ethical code violations related to the author.
18. Reviewed articles should not be used for personal gain or third-party purposes. Additionally, the use of any part of the reviewed manuscript must obtain permission from the author.
19. Review results should be presented honestly, objectively, and supported with clear arguments. Possible review outcomes include: (a) Accepted without revision; (b) Accepted with minor revisions (no further peer review needed after revision); (c) Accepted with major revisions (to be reviewed again after revision); (d) Rejected and recommended for another publication; or (e) Rejected and not recommended for any publication due to significant scientific flaws.

 Code of Ethics for Authors

1. Authors are collectively responsible for the work and content of articles, including methods, analysis, calculations, and details.
2. Authors should respond promptly and professionally to reviewers' comments.
3. Authors must notify the editor if they withdraw their article.
4. Authors are not allowed to list references to publications that have not been read.
5. uthors should describe research limitations.
6. Authors should respect the publisher's request not to publish findings in interviews or through other media before publication.
7. If there is an error in the article, authors must immediately inform the editor or publisher.
8. The use of material from other publications that have copyright must have written permission and acknowledgment.
9. Authors should refer to others' work appropriately in citations and quotes used in the manuscript.
10. Authors should inform the editor if the article is part of a phased, multidisciplinary, or different perspective study.
11. Authors should declare that the submitted article is original, has not been published elsewhere in any language, and is not under consideration by another publisher.
12. When presenting new findings or enhancing previous discoveries, authors must mention previous researchers'/authors'/founders' work.
13. If requested, authors should provide evidence that the research has met ethical research requirements, including field notes.

    Authors should respond adequately if there are comments or feedback after the article is published.