NUSALEGIS: Journal of Legal Studies supports the responsible, transparent, and ethical use of artificial intelligence technologies in scholarly research and publication. Artificial intelligence tools may include generative AI systems, large language models, AI-assisted writing tools, automated translation systems, AI-based data analysis applications, coding assistants, image-generation systems, and other computational tools capable of generating or substantially transforming content.

The use of AI does not reduce or transfer the responsibility of authors for the originality, accuracy, integrity, legality, reliability, and scholarly quality of their manuscript.

Human authors must exercise independent academic judgment and must critically review, verify, and approve all material produced or assisted by AI before submission.

AI Cannot Be an Author

Artificial intelligence tools, chatbots, large language models, and other automated systems must not be listed as authors or co-authors of manuscripts submitted to NUSALEGIS. Authorship requires human intellectual contribution, approval of the final manuscript, responsibility for the integrity of the work, the ability to respond to questions concerning the research, and accountability for published content. AI systems cannot fulfill these responsibilities.

Authors must disclose the use of generative AI when the tool has made a substantive contribution to the preparation or conduct of the research. This includes AI use for generating or substantially rewriting text, conducting analysis, producing tables or figures, generating computer code, developing research outputs, or performing other substantive intellectual or analytical tasks.

The disclosure should identify, where relevant:

• The name of the AI tool;
• The developer or provider of the tool;
• The version or model, where known;
• The purpose for which the AI tool was used;
• The section or stage of the research where AI was used;
• Any relevant method used by the authors to verify the AI-generated output.

Example:

"During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [name of AI tool/model] for [describe purpose, e.g., language editing, coding assistance, or analytical support]. The authors subsequently reviewed and verified all AI-assisted content and take full responsibility for the accuracy, originality, and integrity of the final manuscript."

Because AI systems may generate inaccurate, incomplete, outdated, or nonexistent legal information, authors must independently verify all legal authorities and legal propositions included in a manuscript.

Authors are responsible for verifying that every reference cited in the manuscript actually exists, is accurately described, and supports the statement for which it is cited. AI-generated references must never be inserted into a manuscript without independent verification against the original publication or authoritative source. Fabricated or nonexistent references produced by an AI system may constitute a serious breach of publication ethics when submitted as genuine sources.

The principal scholarly contribution of a manuscript must originate from the human author(s). AI tools must not replace the authors' research judgment, formulation of scholarly arguments, interpretation of law, evaluation of evidence, critical legal analysis, or responsibility for conclusions. A manuscript that consists primarily of unverified AI-generated content without meaningful human scholarly contribution may be considered unsuitable for publication.

The following practices are prohibited:

• Listing an AI system as an author or co-author;
• Submitting AI-generated content without adequate human verification;
• Using AI to fabricate or falsify research data;
• Using AI to fabricate legislation, court decisions, references, quotations, or scholarly sources;
• Using AI-generated text in a manner that results in plagiarism or copyright infringement;
• Using AI to manipulate research findings or misrepresent evidence;
• Using AI to generate false participant data, interviews, survey responses, or empirical evidence;
• Using AI to create deceptive or materially misleading images, tables, or figures;
• Concealing substantive AI use where disclosure is required;
• Entering confidential or sensitive information into AI systems in violation of legal, ethical, contractual, or journal requirements.

AI-generated or AI-modified visual material must not be used in a manner that misrepresents research evidence or creates a false impression of authentic data, documents, events, persons, or legal materials.

Where AI-generated visual content is legitimately used for illustrative purposes, the use must be clearly disclosed and must comply with applicable copyright, licensing, privacy, and ethical requirements.

Use of an AI tool does not exempt authors from NUSALEGIS's Similarity Check Policy and Publication Ethics. Authors must ensure that AI-assisted text does not reproduce copyrighted or previously published material without appropriate acknowledgment. Responsibility for plagiarism or inappropriate textual overlap remains with the human author(s), regardless of whether the problematic material originated from an AI system.

Authors must exercise particular care when using external AI services because information submitted to such systems may be processed, retained, or used according to the provider's terms and privacy policies.

Authors must not upload confidential or protected material to an AI system where doing so would violate applicable requirements, including:

• Personal or identifying information;
• Confidential interview transcripts;
• Unpublished sensitive research data;
• Privileged legal information;
• Confidential institutional documents;
• Materials protected by contractual obligations;
• Information whose disclosure could violate applicable privacy or data-protection requirements.

Confidentiality Takes Priority

Manuscripts received for peer review are confidential documents. Reviewers must not upload a manuscript, substantial sections of a manuscript, unpublished figures, data, author information, or other confidential peer-review materials into publicly accessible or third-party generative AI systems where confidentiality, data retention, or unauthorized reuse cannot be assured.

Reviewers remain personally responsible for the content, accuracy, fairness, originality, and professional quality of their review reports. AI must not replace the reviewer's independent scholarly assessment.

Editors must protect the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts and peer-review materials. Confidential manuscripts should not be uploaded to external generative AI systems where such use could expose unpublished content or violate confidentiality obligations.

Editorial decisions concerning acceptance, revision, or rejection must remain under human editorial responsibility. AI-generated assessments must not independently determine editorial decisions.

NUSALEGIS may use technological tools to assist in identifying potential AI-generated or AI-manipulated content. However, because automated AI-detection systems may produce inaccurate or uncertain results, an AI-detection score alone will not normally constitute conclusive evidence of misconduct. Any concern will be evaluated contextually by the Editorial Team and authors may be asked to provide clarification where appropriate.

Authors are fully responsible for ensuring:

Where the Editorial Team identifies evidence of undisclosed or inappropriate AI use, the journal may request clarification from the author(s). Depending on the nature and seriousness of the issue, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

Actions will be determined according to the journal's Publication Ethics and Retraction, Correction and Withdrawal Policy.

Artificial intelligence technologies and standards for their use in scholarly publishing continue to evolve. Accordingly, NUSALEGIS: Journal of Legal Studies may review and update this policy periodically to reflect developments in technology, publication ethics, research integrity, legal requirements, and accepted scholarly publishing practices. Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to comply with the version of the policy applicable during the relevant editorial process.