The Journal of Law and Social Change Review is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic quality through a rigorous, fair, and transparent double-blind peer-review process. All manuscripts submitted to the journal are evaluated solely on their scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigor, and relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial screening by the Editorial Office and the Editor-in-Chief. During this stage, the manuscript is evaluated to determine whether it:

• Falls within the journal's aims and scope.
• Complies with the Author Guidelines and formatting requirements.
• Meets acceptable standards of academic writing.
• Demonstrates sufficient originality.
• Passes plagiarism screening using plagiarism detection software.

Manuscripts that fail to meet these requirements may be rejected without external review or returned to the authors for technical revision prior to peer review.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial assessment are assigned to at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the manuscript's subject area.

The journal adopts a double-blind peer-review model in which:

• Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.
• Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
• All review materials are treated as confidential.

This process is intended to ensure objectivity, impartiality, and fairness throughout the evaluation.

Reviewer Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are asked to assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:

• Originality and novelty of the research.
• Significance and contribution to legal scholarship.
• Relevance to the journal's scope.
• Clarity of the research objectives.
• Soundness of the research methodology.
• Accuracy of legal analysis and interpretation.
• Organization and coherence of the manuscript.
• Quality and relevance of references.
• Clarity of language and presentation.
• Validity of the conclusions.

Reviewers are encouraged to provide constructive comments and practical recommendations that assist authors in improving their manuscripts.

Editorial Decision

After receiving the reviewers' reports, the handling editor and the Editor-in-Chief evaluate the recommendations before making a final decision.

Editorial decisions may include:

• Accept – The manuscript is accepted for publication without further revisions.
• Minor Revision – The manuscript requires small revisions before acceptance.
• Major Revision – Substantial revisions are required, and the revised manuscript may undergo a second round of peer review.
• Reject – The manuscript does not meet the journal's publication standards or falls outside the journal's scope.

The Editor-in-Chief has the final authority regarding all publication decisions.

Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors should:

• Address each reviewer comment carefully.
• Submit a revised manuscript within the specified deadline.
• Provide a detailed response letter explaining how each comment has been addressed or, where appropriate, justified.

Failure to submit revisions within the specified timeframe may result in withdrawal of the manuscript from the review process.

Confidentiality

Editors and reviewers must treat all submitted manuscripts as confidential documents. Manuscripts and associated materials may not be shared, discussed, or used for personal research or professional advantage without explicit authorization from the journal.

Conflict of Interest

Editors and reviewers must disclose any actual or potential conflicts of interest that could influence their evaluation. Individuals with conflicts of interest will not participate in the review or editorial decision-making process for the relevant manuscript.

Ethical Considerations

If reviewers or editors identify possible ethical concerns—including plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated or falsified data, citation manipulation, or other forms of research misconduct—the journal will investigate the matter in accordance with its Publication Ethics policy and internationally recognized ethical standards.

Review Timeline

The journal strives to provide an efficient and timely review process. While review times may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript, the editorial office aims to complete the initial peer-review process within 4–8 weeks from the date the manuscript enters external review.

Commitment to Quality

The Journal of Law and Social Change Review is dedicated to ensuring that every published article meets high standards of academic integrity, scientific rigor, and scholarly relevance. Through a transparent and independent peer-review process, the journal seeks to promote excellence in legal research and contribute meaningfully to the advancement of legal scholarship and interdisciplinary studies.