The International Journal of Law and Justice follows a structured and impartial peer-review process to evaluate the academic quality, originality, legal reasoning, methodological soundness, and scholarly contribution of submitted manuscripts.

The peer-review process is intended to ensure that manuscripts published by the journal meet appropriate standards of academic rigor, legal accuracy, research integrity, clarity, and scholarly relevance.

On This Page

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial screening before being considered for external peer review. During this stage, the editorial team may assess the manuscript for:

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements may be returned to the authors for correction or declined before external peer review.

2. Similarity & Originality Check

Manuscripts may be checked for textual similarity using appropriate similarity-detection tools as part of the editorial screening process.

Similarity results are evaluated in context and are not treated as an automatic indication of plagiarism. The editorial team may consider the nature, location, extent, and source of matching text, including properly quoted legal provisions, judicial extracts, and commonly used legal terminology.

Where substantial or inappropriate similarity is identified, the manuscript may be returned to the authors for revision, clarification, or appropriate citation, or may be rejected depending on the nature and severity of the issue.

Authors must properly acknowledge all sources, including legislation, judicial decisions, legal commentaries, books, journal articles, reports, and other relevant materials.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

The International Journal of Law and Justice follows a double-blind peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another during the review process, to the extent practicable.

Authors should prepare manuscripts for double-blind review in accordance with the journal's manuscript preparation requirements and remove identifying information where required.

Where necessary, acknowledgments, author affiliations, self-identifying references, and other identifying details should be handled in a manner that preserves reviewer independence.

4. Selection of Reviewers

Manuscripts that proceed beyond the initial editorial screening are assigned to qualified and independent reviewers with relevant academic or subject expertise.

Depending on the subject matter, reviewers may have expertise in constitutional law, criminal law, civil law, international law, human rights, jurisprudence, legal theory, comparative law, intellectual property law, environmental law, or other relevant legal disciplines.

The journal normally seeks evaluation from two or more independent reviewers, depending on the nature of the manuscript and the requirements of the editorial process.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, confidential, and academically appropriate assessments of the manuscript. They should disclose potential conflicts of interest and decline assignments where impartial evaluation may be compromised.

5. Review Criteria

Reviewers may evaluate manuscripts with consideration of the following factors:

The specific criteria may vary according to the article type, legal discipline, jurisdiction, research methodology, and subject matter.

6. Reviewer Recommendations

Following evaluation, reviewers provide comments and recommendations to assist the editor in reaching a publication decision. Possible recommendations include:

7. Revision by Authors

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to address the reviewers' comments carefully and provide a clear response to the issues raised. Authors may be required to submit:

Where appropriate, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation.

Authors should respond professionally to reviewer feedback. Where they disagree with a comment, they should provide a reasoned academic explanation supported by appropriate legal authorities or evidence.

8. Editorial Decision

The editorial decision is based on the manuscript's academic quality, originality, legal reasoning, research methodology, accuracy of legal authorities, ethical compliance, reviewer evaluations, and overall suitability for publication in the International Journal of Law and Justice.

The editor may consider reviewer recommendations but retains independent editorial judgment and may reach a decision that differs from a particular reviewer recommendation where appropriate.

The editorial team may request additional revisions, seek further expert opinions, or decline a manuscript when significant concerns remain unresolved.

9. Final Acceptance & Publication

Once a manuscript has successfully completed the peer-review and editorial process and has been formally accepted, it proceeds to the journal's publication and production procedures.

Where applicable, information regarding the Article Processing Charge (APC), copyright and licensing, formatting, production, DOI assignment, and publication procedures is communicated to the authors in accordance with the journal's relevant policies.

10. Confidentiality & Editorial Independence

Manuscripts submitted to the International Journal of Law and Justice and the contents of peer-review reports are treated as confidential within the editorial and peer-review process, subject to applicable policies and legal or ethical requirements.

Reviewers must not use unpublished manuscript content for personal or professional advantage or disclose confidential information without appropriate authorisation.

Editorial and peer-review decisions are intended to be based on academic and scholarly considerations. Commercial considerations, including Article Processing Charges, should not determine whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected.

The journal aims to maintain impartiality, manage conflicts of interest, and protect the independence of editorial and peer-review decisions.

11. Estimated Review Timeline

The duration of peer review may vary depending on the legal subject area, reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, the need to verify legal authorities, revision requirements, and other factors affecting the editorial process.

The International Journal of Law and Justice does not guarantee a specific peer-review or publication timeline. Authors may be contacted when additional information, clarification, or revisions are required.

Authors are encouraged to ensure that their manuscripts are complete, properly referenced, and prepared according to the journal's submission requirements to help avoid unnecessary delays.

12. Author Responsibility

Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted manuscripts are original, accurately presented, properly referenced, ethically conducted where applicable, and prepared in accordance with the journal's submission and publication requirements.

Authors must ensure that judicial decisions, statutory provisions, regulations, treaties, and other legal authorities are cited accurately and represented fairly. Any material legal developments relevant to the manuscript should be considered where appropriate.

Authors must disclose relevant conflicts of interest, respect confidentiality obligations, obtain permissions for third-party material where required, and provide accurate declarations concerning funding, research ethics, and the use of AI tools where applicable.

By submitting a manuscript to the International Journal of Law and Justice, authors acknowledge that the manuscript may undergo editorial screening, similarity checking, peer review, revision, and final editorial evaluation before a publication decision is made.