THE LEGALITES

ISSN(O)3108-2416

Reviewers Policy

Reviewers Policy

1. OVERVIEW 

The Legalites LexScripta is committed to ensuring the highest standards of academic integrity and quality in legal scholarship. The Journal adopts a rigorous peer review mechanism to evaluate all submissions prior to publication.

This policy outlines the roles, responsibilities, and ethical obligations of reviewers associated with the Journal

2. PEER REVIEW POLICY 

The Journal follows a Double-Blind Peer Review Process, ensuring:

  • Anonymity of author(s) and reviewer(s)
  • Objective and unbiased evaluation
  • Fair and independent decision-making

All manuscripts are initially screened by the Editorial Board and, upon meeting basic requirements, are forwarded for peer review

3. Selection and Appointment of Reviewers

Reviewers are selected by the Editorial Board based on:

  • Academic qualifications and legal expertise
  • Prior research and publication record
  • Professional experience in relevant fields

The Journal maintains a panel of qualified reviewers to ensure subject-specific evaluation.

4. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Evaluate manuscripts on originality, relevance, and scholarly contribution
  • Assess legal reasoning, structure, and clarity
  • Provide constructive, unbiased, and reasoned feedback
  • Recommend acceptance, revision, or rejection
  • Complete reviews within the stipulated timeframe (typically 7–14 days)

5. Confidentiality

All manuscripts under review must be treated as strictly confidential. Reviewers shall not:

  • Share or disclose the manuscript to any third party
  • Use unpublished content for personal research or advantage

6. Conflict of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any conflict of interest, including:

  • Personal or professional relationships with the author(s)
  • Institutional affiliations
  • Any competing interests

In such cases, reviewers are required to decline the review.

7. Ethical Standards and Misconduct

Reviewers shall adhere to high ethical standards in line with the principles of
Committee on Publication Ethics.

If any of the following are identified, reviewers must inform the Editorial Board:

  • Plagiarism
  • Data fabrication or falsification
  • Duplicate or redundant publication

8. Review Recommendations

Reviewers may recommend:

  • Acceptance
  • Minor Revisions
  • Major Revisions
  • Rejection

The final decision regarding publication rests solely with the Editorial Board

9. Acknowledgement of Reviewers

The Journal may acknowledge the contribution of reviewers through:

  • Annual publication of reviewer names
  • Certificates of appreciation

Reviewer identities shall not be disclosed in relation to specific manuscripts

10. Policy Updates

The Journal reserves the right to modify this policy as required. Updated versions will be made available on the official website