Peer Review Policy

The peer review process involves a thorough evaluation of submitted articles by experts in the relevant fields, with the goal of upholding high scholarly standards.

Upon submission, the article is initially screened by the editorial team for compliance with the journal’s guidelines and relevance to its scope. If deemed appropriate, the article is then sent for double-blind peer review. In this system, both the authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other to promote unbiased and objective feedback.

The editorial team selects qualified reviewers who are experts in the subject matter of the article. Reviewers assess the work based on criteria such as originality, methodology, clarity, theoretical and empirical rigor, relevance to the field, and ethical considerations. They also evaluate the article’s contribution to the ongoing scholarly conversation in law, humanities, and sustainable development.

After reviewing the article, the peer reviewers provide detailed feedback, which may include suggestions for improvements, clarification of points, or identification of potential weaknesses. Based on this feedback, the editorial team makes one of the following decisions:
Acceptance The article is accepted for publication as is or with minor revisions.
Minor/major revisions Authors are asked to revise the article in line with reviewer feedback.
Rejection If the article fails to meet the necessary standards, it is rejected.

Once the authors address the reviewers’ comments and submit the revised article, it undergoes a second review if needed. This rigorous process ensures that only high-quality, scholarly work is published, advancing research in law, humanities, and sustainable development.