Peer Review Process

1. Initial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editors. The purpose of this stage is to evaluate:

  • suitability with the journal’s focus and scope,

  • adherence to Author Guidelines,

  • overall academic quality, and

  • compliance with ethical standards (including plagiarism check).

Manuscripts that do not meet the basic criteria may be returned to the authors without external review.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass initial screening will be sent to two independent reviewers under a double-blind peer review process, where:

  • reviewers do not know the authors’ identities, and

  • authors do not know the reviewers’ identities.

The review focuses on:

  • originality and contribution to legal scholarship,

  • clarity of argumentation,

  • theoretical and methodological rigor,

  • relevance and coherence of literature review,

  • accuracy of legal reasoning and data,

  • structure, clarity, and writing quality.

3. Reviewer Recommendations

Reviewers may provide one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept without revision

  • Accept with minor revisions

  • Revise and resubmit (major revisions)

  • Reject

All recommendations must be accompanied by constructive comments to help authors improve their manuscript.

4. Revision Process

Authors receiving revision requests must:

  • revise the manuscript according to reviewer comments,

  • submit a revised version, and

  • include a response-to-reviewers document detailing how each comment was addressed.

Revised manuscripts may be re-evaluated by the same reviewers or reviewed internally by editors, depending on the extent of revisions.

5. Final Decision

The final decision—acceptance or rejection—is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on:

  • reviewer recommendations,

  • adherence to revisions, and

  • overall academic merit and fit with the journal’s publication standards.

6. Proofreading and Layout Editing

Accepted manuscripts undergo:

  • language editing,

  • formatting, and

  • typesetting.

Authors may be asked to review final proofs before publication.

7. Publication

Articles that complete all stages will be scheduled for publication in the journal’s regular issues (April and October).

8. Reviewer Ethics

Reviewers must adhere to ethical standards, including:

  • maintaining confidentiality,

  • avoiding conflicts of interest,

  • providing objective and professional feedback, and

  • refraining from using manuscript content for personal advantage.