Silenced Voices: Unethical Editorial Practices and the Marginalization of African Scholars in Academic Publishing

This article examines unethical editorial practices in academic publishing that disproportionately affect scholars of African origin. The analysis underscores systemic biases manifested in prolonged review delays, unclear rejections, stylistic gatekeeping, and exclusion from editorial decision-making, utilizing empirical data, published testimonies, case studies, and theoretical frameworks, such as deontological, teleological, and African communitarian ethics, particularly Ubuntu. It underscores the structural disparities inherent in global publishing systems, including under-representation on editorial boards and skewed evaluations of scientific legitimacy based on language or institutional affiliation. The psychological and professional repercussions for African academics are demonstrated through qualitative evidence and scholarly literature. The article advocates for reforms that enhance ethical practices, including equitable timeframes, transparent peer reviews, and greater representation of African scholars in editorial positions. The paper advocates for empirical research to evaluate bias and calls on the publishing sector to integrate universal ethical standards with African intellectual perspectives to promote epistemic justice.