PEER REVIEW PROCESS

Peer Review Process

This journal implements a rigorous double-blind peer review system to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of all published articles.

1. Review Model

The journal uses a double-blind review process, where:

  • Reviewers do not know the identity of the authors
  • Authors do not know the identity of the reviewers

This ensures an objective and unbiased evaluation.

2. Reviewer Assignment

  • Each manuscript is reviewed by at least two independent reviewers
  • Reviewers are selected based on their expertise and relevance to the manuscript topic
  • Reviewers must have no conflict of interest with the authors

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

  • Originality and novelty of the research
  • Relevance to the journal’s scope
  • Methodological rigor
  • Clarity of analysis and discussion
  • Contribution to the field (especially Islamic law, family law, and criminal law)
  • Quality of references and citations

4. Review Recommendations

Reviewers provide one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept Submission
  • Revisions Required (Minor Revision)
  • Resubmit for Review (Major Revision)
  • Decline Submission (Reject)

All reviewer comments are sent to the authors for consideration and revision.

5. Revision and Re-Review

  • Authors must revise their manuscript according to reviewer feedback
  • Revised manuscripts may be sent back to reviewers for further evaluation
  • Authors should clearly indicate changes made in response to reviewer comments

6. Final Decision

The final decision is made by the Editor based on reviewer recommendations. The Editor’s decision is final.

7. Review Timeline

  • Initial review process: 2–4 weeks
  • Revision process: 1–3 weeks
  • Final decision: 4–8 weeks (overall)

8. Ethical Standards

  • Reviewers must maintain confidentiality of the manuscript
  • Review must be conducted objectively and constructively
  • Any form of plagiarism, data falsification, or unethical practice must be reported to the Editor

Additional Notes

  • The journal is committed to a fair, transparent, and timely review process
  • Reviewers contribute significantly to maintaining the academic quality of the journal