It depends. There are so called 'Editorials,' short papers, reviews, opinions what are entirely reasonable to publish without peer-reviewing.

Otherwise, I would avoid publishing original research articles in the Journal or would apply extra measures and considerations. Journals have multiple editors, and I would ask one of my co-authors to submit the paper, and it should be assigned to another editor. You need to clarify that you have no intention to influence the peer-reviewing and publishing process.

Once your paper published, this potential conflict of interest can make the readers suspicious about the quality (even you were entirely fair), so better to avoid.

Please let me know if this reference/site is helpful to you:

When editors publish in their own journals - NCBI

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1230831/pdf/cmaj_161_11_1412.pdf

When editors publish in their own journals. From time to ... by our own editors. ... Weir E, Joseph KS. How quickly does CMAJ evaluate submissions? [editor- ial].

Dennis

Dennis Mazur

There is no co-editor in the journal and this is a peer review journal. In case there is co-editor, the other editor could oversee the review process but in the case of this journal, this guy is the only editor on the journal. This brings me to the problem of conflict of interest. How could someone publish in the same journal that he serves as editor every quarterly edition without conflict of interest of interest? This is a shame.

It is okay as long as merely peer reviews have led to the acceptance of an article.

This is a very common practice and is acceptable.  However there is a protocol.  An editor submits his paper to an outside academic not associated with the journal who has a list of the journal’s reviewers.  Those reviewers do the review not knowing that the submitted paper is the editor’s paper. Those reviews are then sent to the outside academic who send the report to the editor who submitted the paper as if he was just a normal author. In effect, the outside academic is a substitute editor only for the purpose of ensuring a fair review process.

I believe it is acceptable only when there are co-editors who could handle papers submitted by the other editors. I am talking about the situation when there are no co-editors. There are journals that have only one editor. This is not normal and should not be encouraged for editors of the same journal with co-editors to publish in the same journal. So, if it is a peer review journal and editor send the paper outside for review, who takes the decision when the reviewers are return for the paper? What if the reviewers reject the paper and the editor (because he is one of the authors or single author) decided to act otherwise? Who checks who? It is a bad practice for editor serving as the only editor of a journal to publish in the same journal. As for journals with co-editors, there may be transparency, because of the existence of the co-editors. Please do not defend this wrong practice.

Please read the link provided by Dennis Mazur :

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1230831/pdf/cmaj_161_11_1412.pdf

According to the article, it is possible when there are co-editors. The co-editors are responsible for handling the paper submitted by the other editors. That is fine. But when there are no co-editors, it is ethically and morally wrong to publish in every edition of the journal you serve as the only editor. Please note that I said, this editor publishes in every edition of the journal. How come? Please, this is not defensible.

It is both discourteous and unprofessional of you to speak to tell a fellow professional in the manner which you have just done. I have  provided expert advice based on a practice in several major research institutions in Canada. Whether or not another jurisdiction follows the protocol  is not relevant to the response.

Thanks for your expert advice. 

Thank you for this question which tackles one of the games of fraud that has infected the academic communities on global scale.

An editor, who publishes in his journal, has to be subjected to scrutiny. If he publishes a paper in every quarterly, then this may be the time required to fake out a paper. Faking out papers has become easier in this world of internet & it includes changes in the phrasing of the title and playing with the vocabulary. In the final touch of deceit, the editor will be the first author & other names “who know nothing about the contents of the paper” will be included as authors after paying a certain fee or in order to “delight” them.

Many universities have promoted persons on the basis of the deception game of publications. You may see a person, who got a big title, after a series of disgraceful acts through which points for promotion were accumulated.

Any wise scholar will, by default, refrain from living a very big lie.

human being is dynamic, the probability of external influence on your judgement is obvious, ethically is incorrect except where there is co-editor

How about this case. It is considered as a respaonsibility of editor in chief!

Editor as author of a paper!

"A subject editor, who oversaw a manuscript, was invited by the authors to become a co-author after the first review round. After inviting the subject editor to become an author (and adding his name to the author list), the revised version of the paper was submitted to the journal. The authors expected that a different subject editor would handle the paper in the next review round.

However, when the revised version was submitted, no one (including the subject editor himself) noticed the addition of the subject editor’s name to the revised paper, and the subject editor took "automatic" care of the revised manuscript when it was assigned to him by the editor-in-chief, who also had not noticed the addition of the subject editor’s name to the paper.

The second revision was directly accepted by the editor-in-chief..."

https://publicationethics.org/case/editor-author-paper

In my view it is acceptable but it don't show good impact on other researchers.