From Religion
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Khair-ul-Ummah Title.jpg
Title of Khair-ul-Ummah
DisciplineReligious Studies
Blind Peer Review
Edited byShafiq ur Rehman
Publication details
Ahsan ul Uloom Peshawar (Pakistani)
Open Access
ISO 4Find out here
ISSN2790-329X (print)
2790-3281 (web)
24 weeks

Khair-ul-Ummah is a Pakistan based research journal started in 2021.

Published Issues


Ethically Guidelines

These guidelines are retrieved from Higher Education Commission (HEC) , Pakistan manual for Ethical Guidelines for Journals, which has been prepared by Dr. Rukhsana Kausar, Director Institute of Applied and Clinical Psychology, University of the Punjab, Lahore

For Authors

The following ethical guidelines are obligatory for all author(s) violation of which may result in application of penalties by the editor, including but not limited to the suspension or revocation of publishing privileges.

Reporting Standards

Will ensure that their search report and data contain adequate detail and references

Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable

Originality and Plagiarism

Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is not acceptable Material quoted verbatim must be placed in quotation marks If more than 19% similarity index has found, As per HEC’s policy it will either be rejected or left at the discretion of the Editorial Board for the purposes of a conditional acceptance


A declaration is required that the manuscript contains solely author original work that is not under consideration for publishing in any other journal in any form A co-authored paper must be accompanied by an undertaking in order to claim right to authorship and to ensure that all have agreed to the order of authorship

Multiple, Redundant and Current Publication

Authors should not submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research to more than one journal or publication except if is a re-submission of a rejected or withdrawn manuscript Concurrent submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable

Acknowledgment of Sources

A paper must always contain proper acknowledgment of the work of others The author(s) must also acknowledge the contributions of people, organizations and institutes who assisted the process of research or financial funding (in the acknowledgement) It is duty of the author(s) to conduct a literature review and cite the original publications

Authorship Credit

Authorship of the work may only be credited to those who have made a noteworthy contribution in conceptualization, conducting, data analysis and writing up of the manuscript The corresponding author should ensure that all co- authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication

Privacy of Participants

Authors must respect the privacy of the participant(s) of research Authors must ensure that in instances where the identity of the participant needs to be revealed in the study, explicit and informed consent of the concerned party is obtained

Data Access and Retention

The author(s) should provide raw data to the Editor, if any question arises about the accuracy or validity of the research work during the review process

The author(s) must provide an accurate description of how the images were generated and produced, and will ensure they are free of manipulation

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

The potential conflicts of interest of all author(s) must be conveyed to the editor at the earliest possible stage, including but not limited to employment, consultancies, honoraria, etc All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed

Manuscript Acceptance and Rejection

During the review period the author can contact the Editor to ask about its status In case of revisions, the author(s) must provide an exposition of all corrections made in the manuscript and the revised manuscript should, then, go through the process of affirmation of revisions and be accepted or rejected accordingly In case of dissatisfaction over the decision of rejection, the author can appeal the decision by contacting the Editor

For Reviewers

The Reviewers should: Inform the Editor, if they do not have the subject expertise required to carry out the review and s/he should inform the Editor immediately after receiving a request Be responsible to act promptly and submit review report on time

Standards of Objectivity

The reviews should be objectively carried out with a consideration of high academic, scholarly and scientific standards

All judgments should be meticulously established and maintained

The decision should purely based on the quality of the research paper and not influenced, either positively or negatively, by any personal, financial, or other conflicting considerations

A reviewer should not use unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript, without the approval of the Editor

A reviewer must declare any potentially conflicting interests (e. g. personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious

A reviewer should be honest enough to declare conflicts of interest, if, the research paper under review is the same as to his/her presently conducted study

If the reviewer feels unqualified to separate his/her bias, s/he should immediately return the manuscript to the Editor without review, and justify to him/her about the situation


Reviewers should consider the research paper as a confidential document and must not discuss its content on any platform except in cases where professional advice is being sought with the authorization of the Editor

Ethical Considerations

If the reviewer suspects that the research paper is almost the same as someone else's work, s/he will ethically inform the Editor and provide its citation as a reference

If the reviewer suspects that results in the research paper to be untrue/unrealistic/fake, s/he will share it with the Editor

If there has been an indication of violating ethical norms in the treatment of human beings (e. g. children, female, poor people, disabled, elderly, etc) , then this should be identified to the Editor

If the research paper is based on any previous research study or is replica of an earlier work, or the work is plagiarized for e. g. the author has not acknowledged/referenced others' work appropriately, then this should be brought in the Editor's knowledge


For evaluating originality, the reviewers should consider the following elements:

Does the research paper add to existing knowledge?

Are the research questions and/or hypotheses in line with the objective of the research work?


If the layout and format of the paper is not according to the prescribed version, the reviewers should discuss it with the Editor or should include this observation in their review report. On the other hand, if the research paper is exceptionally well written, the reviewer may overlook the formatting issues. At other times, the reviewers may suggest restructuring the paper before publication.

The following elements should be carefully evaluated: If there is serious problem of language or expression and the reviewer gets the impression that the research paper does not fulfill linguistic requirements and readers would face difficulties reading and comprehending the paper. The reviewer should record this deficiency in his/her report and suggest the editor to make its proper editing. Such a situation may arise when the author(s) ’ native language is not English

Whether the data presented in the paper is original or reproduced from previously conducted or published work. The papers which reflect originality should be given preference for publication The clarity of illustrations including photographs, models, charts, images and figures is essential to note. If there is duplication then it should be reported in the review report. Similarly, descriptions provided in the “Results” section should correspond with the data presented in tables/figures, if not then it should be clearly listed in the review report

Critically review the statistical analysis of the data. Also check the rational and appropriateness of the specific analysis The reviewers should read the “Methodology” section in detail and make sure that the author(s) has demonstrated the understanding of the procedures being used and presented in the manuscript

The relationship between “Data, Findings and Discussion” requires a thorough evaluation thoroughly. Unnecessary conjecture or unfounded conclusions that are not based on the presented data are not acceptable

Further questions to be addressed are whether: the organization of the research paper is appropriate or deviates from the standard or prescribed format?

Does the author(s) follow the guidelines prescribed by the journal for preparation and submission of the manuscript? Is the research paper free from typographical errors?

Review Report

The reviewer must explicitly write his/her observations in the section of 'comments' because author(s) will only have access to the comments reviewers have made

For writing a review report, the reviewers are requested to complete a prescribed form (s)

It is helpful for both the Editor and author(s) if the reviewer writes a brief summary in the first section of the review report. This summary should comprise the reviewer's final decision and inferences drawn from a full review

Any personal comments on author(s) should be avoided and final remarks should be written in a courteous and positive manner Indicating any deficiencies is important. For the understanding of the Editor and author(s) , the reviewers should highlight these deficiencies in some detail with specificity. This should help justify the comments made by the reviewer

When a reviewer makes a decision regarding the research paper, it should be clearly indicated as 'Reject', 'Accept without revision', or 'Need Revision' and either of the decisions should have justification

The reviewers should indicate the revisions clearly and comprehensively, and show willingness to confirm the revisions submitted by the author(s) , if Editor wishes so

The final decision about publishing a research paper (either accepts or reject) will solely Rest with the Editor and it is not a reviewer's job to take part in this decision. The editor will surely consider reviewer's comments and have a right to send the paper for another opinion or send it back to the author(s) for revision before making the final decision

For Editors

The Editor’s Responsibilities

Establishing and maintaining quality of the journal by publishing quality

Promotion of freedom of expression within the cultural, constitutional/legal framework

Good practices

Encouraging new ideas and suggestions for improving quality of JIRS

Appling the process of blind peer review in its true letter and spirit

Promoting & implementing anti plagiarism & journal’s policy without institutional pressure

Fair play and Impartiality

Will ensure impartial evaluation of the content of research papers Disregard the all discriminating factors during selection of articles, e. g. gender, race, ethnicity, religious belief, etc. of author(s)


Confidentiality of the author(s) and reviewers during the peer review process will be ensured

Confidentiality of the participants of the research should also be ensured

Prior to publication, the content of the manuscript would be kept confidential

Editing and Formatting Guidelines

Clear guidelines about preparing and formatting of a paper are available on JIRS webpage

The Review Process

Articles are initially scrutinized and then go through double-blind peer review process

Sufficient guidelines along with a Reviewer’s Proforma are provided to reviewers (see: Reviewer’s Proforma download section)

Sharing the reviewer’s comments with author and incorporation of suggested corrections

Referring troublesome cases to Advisory Committee

Dealing with Misconduct

Will encourages reviewers to comment on ethical issues and possible misconduct

Confirmation of plagiarism through Turnitin and/or searching for similar titles etc

Will publish a corrigendum, remove and retract a plagiarized article


Only one paper as a PI (Principle Investigator) should be published in the same issue

Editorial Board Members will only be limited to ONE paper per issue

Authorship & co-authorship policy will be strictly adopted

Conflict of Interest

The editors and reviewers will not edit a submitted paper for those author(s) and/or institution against which s/he has any conflicts of interest


will not use any unpublished information/data from the submitted research paper without the permission of the author(s)

Publication Decisions

Only shortlisted research papers relevant to the scope of the journal will be published after completion of the review process Acceptation or rejection of a paper will be based on academic standards The Editor will justifies the reason (s) of rejecting a research paper and will timely communicate the editorial decision to the author(s)

Procedure for Appeal

The Editor is responsible for establishing a proper mechanism for appeals launched against:

The rejection of a research paper

Objections to publications causing harm to any party

Infringement of Ethical boundaries in any manner

Aims & Scope

Aim & Scope


Research Journal Khair ul Ummah, recognized was started in July-2021. It is a peer reviewed journal and is published biannually by the Jamia Ihsan ul Uloom Peshawar, , Peshawar-Pakistan. Its mission is to offer chance of publications to different scholarly articles in the field of Islamic studies, culture and arts. We encourage scholars to send us their research articles in three different languages; Arabic, English and Urdu.

Scope of Journal

We provide a platform for the scholars to particularly address newly emerged issues in the relevant field. The scope of the journal includes but not limited to





Performing arts



Religious studies

Visual arts




Ancient and modern languages


Social economics


Human integrative history

Political science

International relations

Public administration

Public policy





Rural Studies

Gender studies

Global studies

Human ecology

Political ecology

Political economy

Apart from this we publish articles on any topic if they are studied from religious point of view.


The aim of Khair ul Ummah is to provide a platform to the researchers to share their efforts and spread their results to promote research in the field of Islamic Studies, culture, and arts. The particular focus of our journal is to provide with a chance to the scholars and researchers to offer solution to the newly emerged issues in the modern era related to the field of Islamic Sharia and hence help Islam to spread out and come up with answers to such questions.

Contact Info