Review rules

All articles undergo double-blind peer review. Peer review is conducted confidentially: manuscripts are submitted to reviewers through the Journal’s electronic platform in a form that does not contain any information identifying the authors. The Journal maintains an established database of reviewers comprising specialists in the relevant fields of legal scholarship. Information on the composition of the reviewer database, as well as the identity of reviewers assigned to specific manuscripts, is confidential and shall not be disclosed to authors or third parties. Reviewers provide clear, objective, and well-reasoned assessments of the manuscript’s compliance with the Journal’s requirements and academic criteria.

The reviewer shall be entitled to notify the editors or refuse to review if the topic of the article is not in his area of expertise or quick review is impossible. Authors are required to provide reliable results of original research and an objective discussion of its significance.

The results of the review are confidential and not subject to disclosure. Reviewers, if there is a conflict of interest, are not allowed to review the article.

Depending on the outcomes of technical verification and peer review, the article can either be rejected, sent to the authors for revision, or accepted for publication. Upon receiving a positive review, the editors notify the authors that the article will be accepted for publication. In case of comments from reviewers and editors, the author must correct and supplement the article within the specified time frame.