Appeals and Complaints Policy

Appeals and Complaints Policy — BERJ

1. Purpose

The College of Basic Education Research Journal (BERJ) is committed to handling appeals and complaints fairly, transparently, consistently, and within a reasonable timeframe.

This policy distinguishes between editorial appeals concerning publication decisions and complaints concerning the conduct, procedures, policies, or administration of the journal.

All appeals and complaints will be handled impartially, with appropriate confidentiality and with due consideration of potential conflicts of interest.

2. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that:

  • a significant factual or procedural error affected the decision;
  • relevant information was overlooked during the editorial assessment;
  • the decision was based on a demonstrable misunderstanding of the manuscript;
  • there is evidence that the editorial process was inconsistent with the journal's stated policies; or
  • there is a legitimate concern regarding reviewer or editorial bias.

An appeal should provide a clear and specific explanation of the grounds for reconsideration. Simply disagreeing with the editorial judgment, or submitting the same arguments without new justification, will not normally constitute sufficient grounds for an appeal.

An appeal does not guarantee reversal of the original decision.

3. How an Appeal Is Considered

Appeals should initially be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief or the responsible editor, as appropriate.

The editor handling the appeal will review:

  1. the original editorial decision;
  2. the manuscript and relevant editorial records;
  3. the reviewers' comments, where appropriate;
  4. the author's stated grounds for appeal; and
  5. any relevant procedural or ethical considerations.

Where necessary, the journal may seek an additional independent editorial or expert assessment.

The person responsible for the original decision should not determine an appeal where doing so would create an actual or perceived conflict of interest.

The appeal process is intended to determine whether the original decision was reached through an appropriate and fair process. It is not intended to provide an unlimited opportunity for repeated reconsideration of the same decision.

4. Complaints

A complaint concerns dissatisfaction with the journal's conduct, procedures, administration, communication, editorial process, publication practices, or other aspects of journal operations.

Examples may include complaints concerning:

  • unreasonable delays in the editorial or publication process;
  • inappropriate communication;
  • failure to follow the journal's stated procedures;
  • suspected conflicts of interest;
  • concerns regarding editorial conduct;
  • concerns about reviewer conduct;
  • publication-ethics issues; or
  • other procedural or administrative matters relating to the journal.

Complaints should provide sufficient information to allow the journal to investigate the matter appropriately.

5. Complaint Against the Editor-in-Chief

Where a complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief, the complainant should not be required to submit the complaint to the person who is the subject of that complaint.

In such cases, the complaint should be referred to the appropriate internal publishing authority or responsible institutional body of the University of Mosul/College of Basic Education, as applicable.

The same principle applies where the responsible editor is the subject of the complaint.

The person who is the subject of a complaint should not be responsible for determining the outcome of that complaint.

6. Conflicts of Interest

BERJ will take reasonable steps to ensure that appeals and complaints are handled by individuals who are independent of the matter under consideration.

Anyone with an actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest should disclose it and, where appropriate, withdraw from handling the appeal or complaint.

This applies particularly where the matter concerns:

  • the Editor-in-Chief;
  • an associate or handling editor;
  • a reviewer;
  • an editorial board member; or
  • any other person directly involved in the matter.

Where necessary, an alternative suitably independent person or institutional authority will be asked to handle the matter.

7. Expected Response Time

BERJ will acknowledge receipt of an appeal or complaint within a reasonable period and will seek to provide a substantive response within 30 days, where practicable.

More complex cases may require additional time, particularly where they involve:

  • multiple parties;
  • ethical investigations;
  • conflicts of interest;
  • institutional consultation; or
  • external advice.

If additional time is required, the complainant or appellant should be informed of the delay and, where reasonably possible, provided with an indication of the expected timeframe for further response.

8. Confidentiality and Protection From Retaliation

Appeals and complaints will be handled confidentially to the extent reasonably possible and consistent with the need to investigate the matter properly.

BERJ will not tolerate retaliation against an author, reviewer, editor, or other individual who raises a complaint or appeal in good faith.

Information will be shared only with individuals who have a legitimate role in reviewing or resolving the matter.

9. Outcome

The outcome of an appeal or complaint will depend on the nature and findings of the case.

Possible outcomes may include:

  • confirmation of the original editorial decision;
  • reconsideration of the editorial decision;
  • correction of a procedural error;
  • further editorial or independent assessment;
  • referral to an appropriate institutional authority;
  • correction of journal records or published material, where appropriate; or
  • other appropriate corrective action.

The journal will provide the complainant or appellant with an explanation of the outcome, subject to confidentiality and applicable institutional requirements.

10. Finality of Decisions

BERJ aims to resolve appeals and complaints fairly and efficiently.

An editorial appeal will normally receive one substantive reconsideration. Repeated appeals based on the same grounds, without significant new information, may not be considered.

Where a complaint has been appropriately investigated and resolved, further correspondence on the same matter may be limited unless significant new evidence is provided.

11. External and Institutional Escalation

If a matter cannot appropriately be resolved through the journal's internal procedures, or if the complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief or another person who would otherwise be responsible for handling it, the matter may be referred to the appropriate publishing authority or institutional body.

Where appropriate, BERJ may also seek guidance from relevant publication-ethics bodies or other independent experts.

12. Contact

Authors, reviewers, and other parties wishing to submit an appeal or complaint should contact the Editor-in-Chief or the responsible editor, unless that person is the subject of the complaint or has a relevant conflict of interest.

In such cases, the matter should be directed to the appropriate internal publishing or institutional authority.