The Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities (JSSH), published by Kabul University, is committed to maintaining academic integrity, editorial independence, fairness, transparency, and responsible scholarly publishing. This policy establishes the ethical responsibilities of authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher and describes the procedures for addressing suspected research misconduct, publication malpractice, complaints, appeals, corrections, and retractions.

JSSH publishes research in the social sciences and humanities, including education, psychology, sociology, political science, economics, law, history, languages and literature, philosophy, anthropology, communication, cultural studies, and related disciplines. The journal recognizes that research in these fields may involve human participants, interviews, surveys, personal or institutional records, historical documents, cultural materials, and other sources requiring particular ethical care.

This policy applies to all manuscripts submitted to JSSH and all articles published by the journal. All parties involved in the publication process are expected to comply with its requirements.

1. Editorial Responsibilities and Independence

1.1 Publication decisions

The Editor-in-Chief has final responsibility for editorial decisions, taking into account the manuscript's scholarly merit, originality, validity, clarity, relevance to the journal's scope, ethical compliance, and the assessments provided by independent reviewers where applicable.

Editorial decisions must be based on academic considerations and must not be influenced by an author's nationality, ethnicity, gender, religious beliefs, political views, institutional affiliation, personal relationships, or financial circumstances.

Acceptance is not guaranteed by an author's academic position, reputation, institutional affiliation, or relationship with the journal or publisher.

1.2 Initial screening and peer review

All submissions undergo an initial editorial assessment to determine whether they fall within the journal's scope, meet its submission requirements, demonstrate sufficient scholarly merit, and comply with publication ethics.

Manuscripts considered suitable for external assessment are evaluated through JSSH's double-blind peer-review process. The journal normally seeks assessments from at least two independent reviewers with relevant subject expertise.

Editors must select reviewers on the basis of their qualifications, relevant knowledge, and ability to provide an impartial assessment. Manuscripts may be returned for revision or rejected before external review if they are unsuitable for the journal or raise substantial concerns about originality, methodology, scholarly contribution, or ethical compliance.

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision after considering the reviewers' reports, the authors' responses, and the quality of any revisions.

1.3 Fair treatment

Editors must assess manuscripts impartially and consistently. Authors must not be discriminated against on the basis of personal characteristics, institutional affiliation, nationality, or other factors unrelated to the scholarly quality of their work.

Manuscripts addressing sensitive political, social, cultural, religious, or historical issues must be assessed according to the same standards of scholarly rigor, evidence, fairness, and ethical conduct as other submissions.

1.4 Confidentiality

Editors and editorial staff must maintain the confidentiality of submitted manuscripts, reviewer reports, editorial correspondence, and deliberations. Manuscript information may be shared only with individuals who require it for legitimate editorial purposes.

Unpublished material obtained through editorial work must not be used for personal research, professional advantage, or other purposes without the author's express written permission.

Confidentiality may be limited where disclosure is necessary to investigate a credible allegation of misconduct or is required by applicable law. Any such disclosure must be restricted to the information reasonably necessary for the relevant purpose.

1.5 Editorial conflicts of interest

Editors must disclose any financial, professional, institutional, personal, or other relationship that could compromise their impartiality. An editor with a relevant conflict must not manage the affected manuscript or participate in its publication decision.

The manuscript must be assigned to an independent editor who can assess it fairly. The journal must document the reassignment where appropriate.

2. Authors' Responsibilities

2.1 Originality and accuracy

Authors must ensure that submitted manuscripts present original work or clearly identified and properly attributed analysis of existing scholarship. Research methods, evidence, data, interpretations, and conclusions must be reported accurately.

Fabrication of data, falsification of findings, deceptive manipulation of evidence, and deliberate misrepresentation of sources are unacceptable.

Authors must provide sufficient methodological detail and supporting references for readers to evaluate the research and, where applicable, understand how it was conducted or could be replicated.

2.2 Authorship and contributorship

Authorship must be limited to individuals who have made substantial contributions to the conception or design of the study, data collection, analysis, interpretation, or preparation of the manuscript.

All listed authors must approve the final manuscript, agree to its submission, and accept responsibility for their contributions. The corresponding author is responsible for ensuring that the author list is complete, that all authors agree to the order of authorship, and that no individual is listed without an appropriate contribution.

The inclusion of individuals who did not make qualifying contributions, the exclusion of eligible contributors, and the submission of a manuscript without the knowledge or approval of its listed authors are unacceptable.

Individuals who provided assistance but do not qualify for authorship may be acknowledged appropriately, with their consent where necessary.

Changes to authorship after submission require a written explanation and the agreement of all affected authors, subject to editorial approval.

2.3 Exclusive submission and redundant publication

Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously.

A manuscript must not reproduce substantially the same published work without appropriate acknowledgment, disclosure, permission where required, and a legitimate justification for republication.

Authors must disclose relevant overlap with their previous publications, conference papers, preprints, dissertations, or other publicly available work. The editor will assess whether the submitted manuscript makes a sufficiently distinct contribution and whether the overlap is acceptable.

2.4 Research data and supporting evidence

Authors must maintain accurate records of the research and retain relevant supporting materials for a reasonable period after publication, subject to legal, ethical, institutional, and confidentiality requirements.

Where reasonably necessary to assess the validity of a study, the journal may request supporting documentation, research instruments, anonymized data, coding procedures, interview protocols, statistical outputs, documentary sources, or other relevant records.

Authors must provide requested materials where they are available and may lawfully and ethically be shared. Where data cannot be disclosed because of privacy, confidentiality, legal restrictions, or agreements with participants or institutions, authors must explain the restriction.

2.5 Research involving human participants

Research involving human participants must respect their dignity, autonomy, privacy, confidentiality, and welfare. Authors must comply with applicable laws, institutional requirements, and relevant ethical standards.

For research involving interviews, surveys, focus groups, observations, experiments, or other interactions with participants, authors must explain the procedures used to obtain informed consent where required. Participants should be informed about the purpose of the research, their involvement, the intended use of their information, and relevant risks.

Authors must protect participants against unnecessary exposure, harm, coercion, and disclosure of identifying information. Pseudonyms or other appropriate safeguards should be used when necessary to preserve confidentiality.

Where a study requires ethics committee approval, authors must identify the approving body and provide the approval number or other relevant details. If approval was not required or was formally waived, authors must explain the circumstances accurately and provide supporting information when requested.

The use of interviews, surveys, or other research methods does not automatically establish ethical compliance. Authors must demonstrate that the procedures were appropriate to the study and the circumstances of the participants.

2.6 Research involving vulnerable groups and sensitive information

Studies involving children, displaced persons, survivors of violence, individuals in dependent relationships, or other potentially vulnerable groups require particular care.

Authors must describe appropriate safeguards for obtaining consent or assent, protecting identities, managing sensitive information, and minimizing potential harm. Where consent from a legally authorized representative is required, the relevant procedures must be followed.

Researchers must not expose participants to foreseeable and unnecessary social, professional, legal, psychological, or physical harm. The publication of identifiable quotations, photographs, personal histories, or case details requires appropriate authorization and consideration of the risks to the individuals concerned.

2.7 Research involving animals

Where a study involves animals, authors must comply with applicable legal and institutional requirements and obtain approval from the relevant ethics committee or regulatory authority where required.

The manuscript must describe the relevant approval and measures taken to minimize pain, distress, and unnecessary harm.

2.8 Research involving documents, institutions, and communities

Authors must use historical records, institutional documents, archives, cultural materials, and other research sources accurately and responsibly. Sources must not be misrepresented, selectively altered, or presented in a way that materially distorts their meaning.

Where access to records or research materials is governed by legal, institutional, contractual, or confidentiality restrictions, authors must comply with those restrictions.

Researchers must distinguish verifiable evidence from interpretation, opinion, and contested claims. Where the subject is politically, culturally, or socially sensitive, the analysis must remain grounded in appropriate evidence and scholarly reasoning.

2.9 Conflicts of interest and funding

Authors must disclose financial, professional, institutional, personal, or other relationships that could reasonably be perceived as influencing their research or its interpretation.

All relevant funding sources, grants, institutional support, and other material assistance must be acknowledged. Authors should explain the role of funders in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, and the decision to submit the work.

If no relevant funding or competing interests exist, the manuscript must state this explicitly.

2.10 Citation and acknowledgment

Authors must acknowledge the contributions of other researchers and provide accurate citations for ideas, evidence, quotations, methods, and materials obtained from other sources.

References must be genuine, relevant, and accurately represented. Authors must not invent sources, misrepresent cited publications, omit relevant evidence deliberately, or add irrelevant citations to manipulate citation counts.

Direct quotations must be clearly identified and properly attributed. Paraphrasing must reflect genuine restatement and must not conceal the source of another person's ideas or wording.

2.11 Use of artificial intelligence

Authors must comply with the JSSH Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence.

Authors remain responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, and proper attribution of all submitted content, including material prepared with AI assistance. AI systems must not be listed as authors.

Where generative AI has been used beyond basic language correction or editing, authors must disclose the tool and purpose of use as required by the journal's AI policy. AI-generated claims, references, quotations, and other factual information must be independently verified.

3. Reviewers' Responsibilities

3.1 Confidentiality

Reviewers must treat manuscripts and associated materials as confidential. They must not distribute, disclose, or discuss manuscript contents with unauthorized individuals.

Unpublished ideas, arguments, data, interpretations, and research materials obtained through peer review must not be used for personal, professional, or research advantage.

3.2 Objective and constructive assessment

Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts impartially and provide clear, evidence-based comments. Assessments should address originality, theoretical grounding, research design, methodological appropriateness, quality of evidence, interpretation, relevance to the journal's scope, and ethical compliance.

Personal criticism, discriminatory remarks, unsupported allegations, and comments unrelated to the scholarly merits of the manuscript are unacceptable.

Reviewers should identify both the strengths and the limitations of a submission and explain their recommendations sufficiently for the editor and authors to understand the basis of the assessment.

3.3 Conflicts of interest

Reviewers must disclose any financial, personal, institutional, professional, or academic relationship that could affect their impartiality. They must decline a review assignment when a relevant conflict cannot be adequately managed.

Reviewers must not contact authors directly about a manuscript under review unless the editor has authorized such communication.

3.4 Recognition of relevant scholarship and ethical concerns

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have overlooked and alert the editor to substantial similarities with other publications, unsupported claims, questionable evidence, or possible ethical violations.

Concerns should be explained with supporting information where possible. Reviewers should not make accusations of misconduct without a reasonable evidential basis.

3.5 Timeliness and responsible use of AI

Reviewers should complete assessments within the agreed timeframe and inform the editor promptly if they cannot do so.

Reviewers must comply with the journal's AI policy. They must not upload confidential manuscripts or identifying information to unauthorized AI systems or use generative AI to produce peer-review assessments. Limited language editing of review comments must comply with the journal's stated policy and must not compromise manuscript confidentiality.

4. Publisher's Responsibilities

Kabul University, as the publisher of JSSH, supports the editorial team in maintaining editorial independence, responsible publishing practices, and the integrity of the scholarly record.

The publisher is responsible for supporting appropriate publishing infrastructure, preserving published content, and cooperating with the editorial team when substantiated concerns about research or publication misconduct arise.

The publisher must not interfere with editorial decisions for personal, political, institutional, or commercial reasons. Advertising, sponsorship, revenue, and other financial considerations must not determine whether a manuscript is accepted, rejected, corrected, or retracted.

Where serious concerns arise, the publisher may assist in preserving relevant records, communicating with appropriate institutions, and addressing legal or administrative matters associated with the publication.

5. Plagiarism and Similarity Screening

JSSH considers plagiarism a serious violation of academic integrity. Plagiarism occurs when a person presents another person's words, ideas, arguments, data, findings, or other intellectual work as their own without appropriate acknowledgment.

Plagiarism may include:

• Copying text or ideas without proper citation.

• Reproducing another person's work in whole or in part without appropriate attribution.

• Paraphrasing a source while retaining its wording or structure without adequate acknowledgment.

• Using another person's data, figures, tables, or other materials without attribution or permission where required.

• Submitting another person's work under one's own name.

• Misrepresenting or fabricating references.

• Reusing substantial portions of one's previously published work without appropriate disclosure and acknowledgment.

JSSH screens submissions for textual similarity using Turnitin or other appropriate tools. Similarity reports are evaluated in context, taking into account the nature, extent, source, and location of the matched material. A similarity percentage alone does not establish whether plagiarism has occurred.

Where concerns are identified, the editor may request explanations, revised text, accurate citations, supporting documents, or evidence of permission. Substantial plagiarism, deliberate concealment, or an inability to establish the originality of a manuscript may result in rejection.

If plagiarism is suspected after publication, the journal will assess the evidence and follow the procedures described in Section 7. Depending on the findings, the journal may publish a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction notice.

6. Copyright and Responsible Use of Published Material

Authors must ensure that they have the necessary rights to submit and publish all materials included in their manuscripts.

Permission must be obtained where required for the reproduction or adaptation of copyrighted text, figures, tables, images, questionnaires, or other protected material. Proper citation alone does not replace permission where permission is legally required.

JSSH is an open-access journal. Authors retain copyright in their published work, and articles are made available under the journal's stated Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC 4.0).

Users of published material must comply with the applicable licence terms, including attribution requirements and restrictions on commercial reuse. Uses outside the permissions granted by the licence require authorization from the relevant rights holder.

The journal may decline a manuscript or take appropriate post-publication action if it contains unlawful material, infringes copyright, violates privacy, or raises a substantiated legal concern.

7. Handling Allegations of Research or Publication Misconduct

JSSH investigates credible allegations of research or publication misconduct through a fair, confidential, impartial, and documented process.

Potential misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

• Plagiarism and unauthorized reuse of intellectual work.

• Fabrication or falsification of research data, findings, or documentary evidence.

• Manipulation or selective alteration of evidence in a misleading manner.

• Duplicate or redundant publication and simultaneous submission.

• Improper authorship, including guest authorship, ghost authorship, or unauthorized changes to the author list.

• Undisclosed conflicts of interest that materially affect the research or publication process.

• Research conducted without required ethical approval or informed consent.

• Unauthorized disclosure of confidential or identifiable participant information.

• Copyright infringement or misuse of restricted research materials.

• Manipulation of peer review or attempts to improperly influence editorial decisions.

• Other conduct that materially compromises the reliability, ethical validity, or integrity of published research.

7.1 Reporting a concern

Authors, reviewers, readers, researchers, institutions, and other individuals may report suspected misconduct to the Editor-in-Chief using the journal's official contact information.

Reports should identify the manuscript or published article, describe the concern clearly, and provide relevant supporting evidence where available. Anonymous reports may be considered when they contain sufficiently specific and verifiable information.

7.2 Preliminary assessment

The Editor-in-Chief or an appropriately appointed independent editor will conduct an initial assessment to determine whether the allegation warrants further investigation.

The assessment may involve examining the manuscript, similarity reports, source publications, original data, interview records, research instruments, correspondence, ethics documentation, or other relevant materials.

If the allegation concerns the Editor-in-Chief or another editor who would ordinarily manage the case, the matter must be assigned to an independent editor without a conflict of interest.

7.3 Formal investigation and right to respond

Where a credible concern is identified, the journal will notify the relevant author or authors and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond.

The journal may request original research records, supporting evidence, explanations of overlapping publications, authorship documentation, ethics approval records, permission letters, or other relevant materials.

When necessary, the journal may consult independent subject experts, institutional research-integrity officers, ethics committees, research organizations, or other appropriate authorities.

The investigation must distinguish deliberate misconduct from honest error, inadequate reporting, or a misunderstanding that can be resolved through clarification or correction. The journal will consider the available evidence and the responses received before reaching a decision.

Records of the allegation, evidence, correspondence, responses, and outcome must be maintained as appropriate.

7.4 Institutional communication

Where the evidence indicates possible serious misconduct, or where the journal cannot independently establish the facts, JSSH may contact the author's institution, research organization, funder, ethics committee, or another appropriate authority.

Such communication may be necessary to verify research procedures, establish the authenticity of evidence, or request an institutional investigation.

Information will be shared only to the extent reasonably necessary for the investigation and subject to applicable legal and confidentiality requirements.

7.5 Possible outcomes

Depending on the evidence and seriousness of the concern, the journal may:

• Close the case if the allegation is unsupported.

• Request clarification, correction, or additional documentation.

• Require revisions before further editorial consideration.

• Reject the manuscript before publication.

• Publish a correction or clarification for a published article.

• Publish an expression of concern while a significant issue remains unresolved.

• Retract a published article when the criteria in Section 8 are met.

• Notify an appropriate institution or authority when further investigation is warranted.

The editor will communicate the decision and its reasons to the relevant parties as appropriate. An allegation alone must not be treated as proof of misconduct.

8. Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

JSSH is committed to maintaining an accurate and reliable scholarly record. Published articles will not be removed or altered merely because their conclusions are disputed, unpopular, or inconsistent with other research.

Post-publication action must be proportionate to the nature and seriousness of the problem and based on a documented assessment.

8.1 Corrections

A correction may be published when an error in a published article requires amendment but does not invalidate the principal findings or arguments.

Examples include errors in author information, references, data presentation, tables, figures, or text that can be corrected without undermining the overall reliability of the article.

A correction notice will identify the affected article, describe the error, and explain the amendment. The notice will be linked to the original article, and the online record will be updated where appropriate.

Where an error materially affects the interpretation of the findings but can be resolved adequately through a transparent correction, the journal will assess the appropriate action based on the evidence.

8.2 Expressions of concern

An expression of concern may be published when the journal has credible evidence of a potentially serious problem but cannot yet reach a final conclusion.

This may occur when an investigation is incomplete, essential evidence is unavailable, or an institutional inquiry is delayed.

The notice will identify the affected article and explain the nature of the concern to the extent possible without presenting unverified allegations as established facts.

The journal will review the matter when additional evidence becomes available and may replace the expression of concern with a correction, a retraction, or another appropriate notice.

8.3 Grounds for retraction

JSSH may retract a published article when a documented assessment establishes that the article's reliability, ethical validity, or lawful publication is seriously compromised.

Grounds for retraction include:

• Clear evidence that the principal findings or conclusions are unreliable because of serious errors, fabricated or falsified evidence, or substantial methodological or analytical problems.

• Substantial plagiarism or unauthorized reproduction of intellectual work.

• Duplicate or redundant publication that materially misrepresents the originality or publication history of the work.

• Serious research-ethics violations, including the absence of required approval or consent where this invalidates the ethical basis of the research.

• Deliberate or serious manipulation of research data, documentary evidence, quotations, images, or other materials.

• Serious breaches of participant confidentiality or privacy that cannot be adequately resolved through a limited correction.

• Material copyright infringement or unauthorized use of protected material that cannot be resolved through an adequate alternative remedy.

• Undisclosed competing interests or other serious undisclosed circumstances that fundamentally compromise the reliability or integrity of the publication.

• Other substantiated circumstances that make the article fundamentally unreliable or render its continued publication misleading.

Retraction is intended to correct the scholarly record. It does not, by itself, constitute a determination of legal liability or replace an institutional investigation into individual misconduct.

8.4 Retraction procedure

Before retracting an article, the journal will assess the available evidence, notify the relevant authors of the concerns, and provide a reasonable opportunity to respond.

The journal may consult independent experts or appropriate institutions when necessary. A retraction may proceed when the evidence sufficiently establishes the grounds for retraction, even if an author does not respond or disagrees with the decision.

The journal will document the reasons for the decision and issue a retraction notice that:

• Clearly identifies the affected article and provides its bibliographic information and DOI, where available.

• Explains the reason for retraction and distinguishes established findings from unresolved matters.

• Identifies the party or body issuing the retraction where appropriate.

• Is linked to the original article and remains freely accessible.

• Is published promptly after the decision has been finalized.

The original article will normally remain accessible to preserve the scholarly record but will be clearly marked as retracted and linked to the retraction notice. The journal will update relevant metadata and publication records where technically possible.

8.5 Withdrawal before publication

A manuscript may be withdrawn before publication when a legitimate reason is established and the request is handled through the journal's editorial procedures.

If withdrawal is requested because of suspected misconduct, duplicate submission, authorship disputes, or another unresolved ethical concern, the journal may investigate the matter before closing the submission.

Withdrawal does not automatically terminate an investigation into suspected misconduct.

9. Complaints and Appeals

JSSH provides a mechanism for authors and other affected parties to raise concerns about editorial decisions, peer review, publication procedures, or compliance with this policy.

9.1 Complaints

Complaints should be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief through the journal's official contact information. They should identify the issue clearly, provide relevant details, and include supporting information where available.

Complaints will be assessed fairly, confidentially, and impartially. The journal may request further information before reaching a decision.

A person whose conduct is the subject of a complaint must not be the sole decision-maker in resolving that complaint.

Where a complaint concerns the Editor-in-Chief, the complainant may contact the publisher or an appropriate university authority for independent consideration.

9.2 Appeals against editorial decisions

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by submitting a reasoned explanation identifying a substantive error in the assessment, a material misunderstanding of the manuscript, overlooked evidence, a relevant conflict of interest, or a significant procedural irregularity.

An appeal must address the basis of the original decision rather than merely express disagreement with the outcome.

The journal may assign the appeal to an independent editor or consult an additional expert who was not involved in the original decision.

Following assessment, the journal may uphold the original decision, reconsider the manuscript, or arrange a further independent evaluation. An appeal does not guarantee acceptance or automatically restart peer review.

The decision following the appeal will normally be final.

10. Conflicts of Interest and Funding Disclosure

All participants in the publication process must disclose relationships or circumstances that could compromise, or reasonably appear to compromise, their impartiality.

Authors must disclose relevant competing interests and research funding at submission. Reviewers must disclose conflicts before accepting a review assignment. Editors must disclose conflicts and transfer responsibility for affected manuscripts to an independent editor.

The journal will assess the nature and potential effect of a disclosed conflict and determine whether reassignment, additional disclosure, independent review, or another measure is necessary.

The existence of a conflict does not automatically establish misconduct. However, failure to disclose a material conflict may require further investigation and appropriate editorial action.

Funding statements and competing-interest declarations must be included in the manuscript or the relevant submission fields, as required by the journal.

11. Research Ethics and Protection of Participants

JSSH expects all research involving human participants, personal data, vulnerable groups, or animals to comply with applicable legal requirements, institutional standards, and recognized principles of responsible research.

Authors must describe relevant ethical approval, informed-consent procedures, and safeguards for privacy and confidentiality. Where consent or formal approval was waived by an authorized body, the manuscript must state this accurately and provide supporting information when requested.

Researchers must take particular care when publishing information about children, survivors of violence, displaced persons, individuals in dependent relationships, or people whose identities or circumstances could expose them to harm.

The journal may request ethics approval letters, consent documentation, research protocols, or other supporting evidence. Manuscripts may be rejected, and published articles may be subject to post-publication action, if required ethical safeguards were not observed or the reported research cannot be adequately verified.

12. Artificial Intelligence and Automated Tools

JSSH recognizes that AI and automated tools may be used in research and manuscript preparation, but their use must not compromise research integrity, confidentiality, or editorial independence.

Authors, reviewers, and editors must comply with the journal's separate AI policy.

Authors remain responsible for all submitted content and must disclose substantive generative AI use as required by that policy. AI systems cannot be listed as authors.

Reviewers must protect confidential manuscript content and must not use generative AI systems to generate peer-review assessments. Editors must base decisions on their own scholarly judgment and the available evidence rather than delegate publication decisions to AI systems.

The journal may use appropriate automated tools for administrative tasks, similarity screening, or other technical checks. Automated outputs must be reviewed by responsible human personnel before editorial action is taken.

Failure to comply with the AI policy may result in manuscript rejection, correction, retraction, or other appropriate action, depending on the nature and seriousness of the violation.

13. Policy Implementation and Review

The Editor-in-Chief and editorial team are responsible for implementing this policy during submission, peer review, publication, and post-publication assessment.

Decisions concerning misconduct, complaints, corrections, expressions of concern, and retractions must be based on available evidence, documented reasoning, and the procedures described in this policy.

The journal will seek to handle comparable cases consistently while taking account of the nature, seriousness, and circumstances of each case. The policy will be reviewed periodically and updated when necessary to reflect changes in the journal's publishing practices, research-ethics requirements, and applicable legal obligations.

For questions, complaints, appeals, or reports of suspected research or publication misconduct, please contact the Editor-in-Chief through the official contact information provided on the JSSH website.

Last updated: July 2026