Policies

Copyright & Licensing Policy 

Copyright on articles is shared between the authors/s, the Institute for Security Studies and the University of Cape Town. All articles published in SACQ can be reused under the following CC license: CC BY-SA Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Open Access Policy 

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Articles from this journal can be submitted to institutional repositories under the following conditions:

Include the DOI as part of the citation to the article.

Editorial Policy 

SACQ subscribes to the ASSAf National Code of Best Practice in Editorial Discretion and Review for South African Scholarly Journals. The journal upholds the highest standards of research integrity and publishing ethics and follows best practices for authors, reviewers, and editors. 

Breaches of integrity, whether intentional or unintentional, include: 

  • Plagiarism
  • Lack of ethics clearance
  • Gift and ghost authorship
  • AI-generated content
  • Breach of confidentiality
  • Non-disclosure of conflicts of interest

The Managing Editors will investigate all concerns transparently and efficiently. Proven ethical breaches will result in manuscript rejection or article retraction. Intentional misconduct will result in a ban from future submissions and may be reported to the author’s institution and funders. Ethical concerns should be raised with the Managing Editors or, where appropriate, members of the Editorial Board.

Digital Preservation Policy

This journal uses the Portico system to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. Click here to view SACQ in the Portico Keeper's Registry. 

Preprints Policy 

SACQ does not accept or offer preprints. This means that the journal does not consider manuscripts previously posted as preprints, nor does it publish or distribute preprints on behalf of authors. All submissions must be original and unpublished. 

Open Peer Reviews Policy 

SACQ does not offer open peer reviews. The journal uses a closed peer review process – reviewer identities are not disclosed to authors, and reviews are not published. All feedback remains confidential. 

Corrections/retractions Policy 

A published article forms part of the published record and will not be altered or removed except as follows. A correction will be published if a published article contains a significant error that affects, for example, the accuracy of the article. The correction will be linked to the original article online and indicated in the article title, e.g. ‘(with corrigendum)’, and on the article landing page and downloaded PDFs. 

Under exceptional circumstances, articles may need to be retracted, removed, or replaced to protect the integrity of the literature. The Managing Editors will determine whether a retraction is necessary, but it may be initiated at the author's request in cases of flawed data or conclusions. A notice of retraction will include the title and authors of the article, the reason for the retraction, and who is retracting the article. 

Artificial Intelligence Policy

SACQ recognises the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools and large language models (LLMs) to enhance the writing process. However, their use must align with ethical research and publication standards. Authors must ensure that the intellectual contributions in the manuscript are their own. AI should not be used to write content or perform analyses on behalf of the author.

Permitted uses of AI tools

  • Language and readability: Authors may use AI tools to improve spelling, grammar, and overall readability of their manuscripts. Such usage does not require disclosure.

Prohibited uses of AI tools

  • Content generation: AI-generated content is not permitted in manuscripts. Submissions containing such content will be declined or retracted if already published.
  • Authorship: AI tools cannot be credited as authors, as they cannot take responsibility for the work.

Authors are solely responsible for the originality, validity, and integrity of their manuscripts. Any use of AI tools must be appropriately referenced, and authors must ensure compliance with research and publishing ethics. Concealing the use of AI tools is unethical and violates the principles of transparency and honesty in research. 

As AI technology evolves, this policy will be revised to reflect new ethical considerations and best practices in scholarly publishing. For further guidance, authors may refer to the ASSAf and SciELO Guidelines for the Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools and Resources in Research Communication. 

Authorship Policy

Authorship on a research output requires substantial participation in the project and agreement by all authors prior to submission. To qualify for authorship, individuals must meet all of the following criteria:

  • Contribution: Significant involvement in at least one of the following areas: 
    • Conception and design of the research.
    • Execution of the research (data acquisition and/or experimentation).
    • Analysis and interpretation of the research findings.
  • Drafting and Revision: Drafting at least part of the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content.
  • Approval: Participation in the final approval of the version of the manuscript to be published.

  Responsibilities:

  • Corresponding Author: The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that all listed authors agree on the authorship order, the content of the manuscript, and its submission.
  • All Authors: All authors are accountable for the originality, validity, and integrity of their contributions to the work. They are also responsible for ensuring compliance with relevant research and publishing ethics.

  Specific Considerations:

  • Student-Supervisor Publications: In cases where a co-authored publication by a student and their research supervisor is substantially based on the student's dissertation or thesis, the student will normally be listed as the first author.
  • Non-Qualifying Contributions: The following contributions alone do not qualify for authorship: 
    • Solely acquiring funding for the research project or data collection.
    • Providing general supervision or leadership of a research group.
    • Holding a mere institutional position, such as Head of Department.

Ethics policy

SACQ will soon require proof of ethics clearance on submission. In the interim, authors are expected to have obtained clearance where necessary. It is the author’s sole responsibility to ensure that data collection involving people – through interviews, focus groups, etc. – is conducted responsibly, with consent, and with careful consideration of the implications of publishing such material. Editors or reviewers may request information about ethics clearance at their discretion. Authors are encouraged to indicate their institutional ethics clearance status in the methods section to pre-empt any concerns.

Peer review policy

SACQ is a non-profit journal and the entire editorial and peer review process is carried out on a voluntary basis. No contributors, including editors and reviewers, receive payment for their work. While the editorial team strives to move submissions through the review process as efficiently as possible, delays may occur due to reviewer or author availability. We appreciate authors’ patience and understanding throughout the process.

We are deeply grateful to our reviewers for their time, expertise, and thoughtful engagement. We encourage authors to contribute to the peer review process as part of supporting a collaborative and rigorous publishing community.

Peer Review Process

All submissions, reviews, and revisions must go through the online platform. Submission processing through email correspondence with the Managing Editors will only be accepted under exceptional circumstances.

All submissions are first reviewed by the Managing Editors to assess scope, quality, and adherence to the Author Guidelines. Manuscripts that do not comply may be declined by the Managing Editors or returned to authors for revision before peer review. Authors must ensure their manuscripts are fully anonymised before submission.

Submissions that pass initial checks are assigned to an editor who may:

  • Reject manuscripts that are out of scope or overly technical
  • Request revisions for clarity or style before review
  • Assign appropriate reviewers

Research articles undergo double-blind peer review by at least two reviewers. Other submission types (e.g. commentary, book reviews, or case notes) are reviewed by a member of the Editorial Board but may be sent for external review at the Managing Editors’ discretion.

Reviews

Most reviewers are South African experts in the relevant fields, but international reviewers are also used. Reviewers are given two weeks to complete their report.

Reviewer recommendations are selected from the following options:

  • Accept Submission: The article is ready for publication with no substantive changes.
  • Revisions Required: The article requires minor to moderate revisions that can be assessed by the editorial team, not requiring a second round of peer review.
  • Resubmit for Review: Major revisions are required. The revised article should return for a second round of peer review (ideally to the same reviewer).
  • Resubmit Elsewhere: The article has clear merit, but is not suitable for SACQ’s focus, scope or readership.
  • Decline Submission: The article is not suitable for publication in SACQ.

If reviewer recommendations diverge, a third reviewer may be invited. Authors receive anonymised reviewer reports along with the editorial decision. Editors generally share the full reviewer comments with authors but may, at their discretion, summarise or omit certain elements where appropriate.

Revisions

Authors are given three weeks to submit revisions. Revisions should be accompanied by a clear explanation of how reviewer comments have been addressed or a justification where changes were not made. Revised manuscripts must be submitted via the platform within the same submission record. Major revisions may be re-reviewed before a final decision is made.

After acceptance

Accepted manuscripts enter the production queue for copy-editing, layout, and proofing.

Appeals

Authors may appeal editorial decisions in writing to the Managing Editors.

 

Policy on Inclusive Language and Racial Classifications

Inclusive language acknowledges diversity, respects differences, and avoids implying superiority of any group based on gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, disability, health status, age, socio-economic status, or other social markers. Authors should carefully consider whether referring to these markers is relevant to their manuscript rather than assuming their relevance by default. When such descriptors are necessary and valid, authors must provide a clear rationale. They should avoid stereotypes and cultural assumptions, ensuring that contextual information on socio-demographic factors and social determinants is included where relevant – especially when addressing disparities and inequities.