Publication Ethics
The journals published by IMPERIUM all adhere to the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, https://publicationethics.org/core-practices) and follow their guidelines in respect of publication ethics and managing problems when they arise.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF AUTHORS
Plagiarism. The unattributed copying of another published or unpublished work, or the theft of the ideas of another researcher is considered a serious offence. If suspected authors will be contacted and – if under review – the article will be held until the issue is resolved. Note that all articles are checked for plagiarism when submitted.

Authorship: all people who comply with the definition of authors (above) should be named as authors on the article, and, similarly, nobody who does not comply should be included as an author. Authors may not be added or deleted after submission without full explanation and written consent of all authors.

Conflict of Interest: all authors must declare if they have any conflict of interest that may have biased either their research or the article submitted.

Misleading or misreporting of findings: authors are required to ensure that they do not selectively, or incorrectly, report their findings, or use language to mislead the readers.

In all cases, the publisher reserves the rights to contact the authors' institutions is serious misconduct has been identified, and to retract any articles in which serious misconduct has been identified.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF REVIEWERS

AKURASI’s reviewers serve as volunteers for the journal. Since most of them have full-time jobs, their work for AKURASI should not be their top priority. Reviewers can decline review invitations if they cannot complete the task promptly or feel unqualified due to their current workload or other commitments.

Reviewers who accept assignments are expected to submit their reviews within three weeks. If they realize they lack the expertise to conduct a review or have a potential conflict of interest, they should recuse themselves from the assignment.

Information obtained through the peer review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Reviewers must treat all received manuscripts as confidential and not discuss them with others unless authorized by the Editor.

Reviewers should conduct their reviews objectively, refraining from personal criticism of the authors and providing detailed and constructive feedback. They should also identify any relevant published work that has not been cited and report any ethical concerns related to the research in the manuscript to the responsible Editor.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF EDITORS

The Editor is responsible for deciding whether a manuscript should be published in the journal. The Editor follows the journal's policies determined by the editorial board and complies with legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult with the Associate Editor, members of the editorial team, and reviewers when making publication decisions.

Manuscripts are evaluated based on their intellectual content without consideration of the author's race, color, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. Information about a manuscript under consideration will only be disclosed to the author(s), reviewers, potential reviewers, and, in some cases, to the editorial board members.

To ensure the integrity of the blind review process, the editors will make every effort to conceal the identity of the author(s) from the reviewers and vice versa. In addition to standard criteria for evaluating a manuscript, the editors will also seek evidence that ethical concerns have been addressed in the research. They will assess whether the benefits of the research outweigh any potential harms.

As the journal welcomes submissions from any country, the editors may need clarification from the author(s) regarding research ethics and ethical approval, which vary worldwide. Authors may be asked to provide a letter from the relevant institutional ethics committee or board that approved the research.

The editors will follow COPE's Guidelines when considering retracting, expressing concern about, or issuing corrections about published articles. They are committed to working closely with research organizations and institutions, as per COPE's advice on cooperation between research institutions and journals on research integrity cases.

Correction
If an error is discovered after publication, it will be corrected by an erratum, retraction or in-line (dated) correction. Authors and readers are encouraged to inform the publisher and Editor-in-Chief if they notice anything that should be corrected.

Reported errors will be investigated by the publisher and Editor-in-Chief, and discussed with the authors. The appropriate correction will be made after this consultation.

Articles will be retracted if there is evidence of unethical research, unreliable data, misconduct or plagiarism, or if there are sufficient mistakes to invalidate the article.

Misconduct
IMPERIUM and the journal follow the recommendations and policies of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding ethical policies and dealing with misconduct. Misconduct includes falsifying data, plagiarising others' works, and breach of confidentiality. Each case will be considered by the publisher and Editor-in-Chief, and in all cases the author (or reviewer) will be contacted directly. However, the publisher reserves the right to speak directly to the author's or reviewer's institution or other appropriate organization if severe misconduct is suspected.

Note that if misconduct is suspected during the review process the manuscript will be held until any concerns have been resolved. If misconduct is confirmed during the review process the manuscript will be immediately rejected. If misconduct is proved after publication then the article will be retracted.

Retraction Policy
Standards for dealing with retractions have been developed by a number of library and scholarly bodies, and this practice has been adopted for article retraction by AKURASI: in the electronic version of the retraction note, a link is made to the original article. In the electronic version of the original article, a link is made to the retraction note where it is clearly stated that the article has been retracted. The original article is retained unchanged, save for a watermark on the PDF indicating on each page that it is “retracted.”

Complaints
Where an author, reviewer, reader, or other person has a complaint against the journal or editors, they should speak directly to the publisher in the first instance. Wherever possible, the complaint will be dealt with by the relevant publishing or editorial person. Where a resolution is not satisfactory it will be passed to a more senior person for resolution.