THE LEGALITES

ISSN(O)3108-2416

PEER REVIEW POLICY

DOUBLE BLIND PEER REVIEW POLICY

1. Overview

The Legalites LexScripta follows a rigorous and transparent peer review mechanism to ensure the publication of high-quality legal research. All submissions are subject to a Double-Blind Peer Review Process prior to publication.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review System

The Journal adopts a Double-Blind Peer Review System, wherein:

  • The identity of the author(s) is not disclosed to the reviewer(s)
  • The identity of the reviewer(s) is not disclosed to the author(s)

This system ensures impartiality, eliminates bias, and promotes objective evaluation of manuscripts.

3. Initial Editorial Screening

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes a preliminary review by the Editorial Board to assess:

  • Relevance to the scope of the Journal
  • Basic quality and structure
  • Compliance with submission guidelines
  • Plagiarism check

Manuscripts failing to meet these criteria may be rejected at this stage.

4. Reviewer Assignment

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are assigned to two independent reviewers with relevant subject-matter expertise.

The Editorial Board ensures that:

  • Reviewers have no conflict of interest
  • The review process remains anonymous

5. Review Process

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript on:

  • Originality and novelty of the research
  • Legal analysis and reasoning
  • Methodology and structure
  • Clarity, coherence, and language
  • Contribution to legal scholarship

Reviewers are required to submit their reports within 7–14 days.

6. Review Outcomes

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the manuscript may be:

  • Accepted
  • Accepted with Minor Revisions
  • Returned for Major Revisions
  • Rejected

In case of conflicting recommendations, the Editorial Board may:

  • Assign a third reviewer, or
  • Take a reasoned final decision

7. Revision Stage

Authors receiving revision requests must:

  • Address all reviewer comments
  • Submit a revised manuscript within the stipulated time
  • Provide a response sheet indicating changes made

The revised manuscript may be sent for further review, if required.

8. Final Decision

The final decision regarding publication rests with the Editorial Board. The decision shall be communicated to the author(s) along with reviewer comments.

9. Confidentiality

All manuscripts and review reports are treated as confidential documents. Neither authors nor reviewers shall disclose any part of the process.

10. Ethical Standards

The peer review process adheres to the principles laid down by
Committee on Publication Ethics.

Any instance of misconduct, including plagiarism or unethical research practices, shall be dealt with strictly.

11. Timeline

The Journal endeavors to complete the peer review process within 2–4 weeks from the date of submission.

12. Policy Updates

The Journal reserves the right to modify this policy as necessary. Updated versions shall be published on the official website.