The article in the journal Law and World is published based on the two positive reviewers.
In cases where a manuscript receives one positive and one negative review, it will be forwarded to a third reviewer.
The editorial board makes the decision to publish the paper based on two positive recommendations, however, this does not guarantee the publication of the paper, as the final decision on publication is made by the editorial board.
The editor-in-chief selects a reviewer for each article in close consultation with the editorial board members.
The selected reviewers are scholars working in different universities worldwide whose competence and academic works are consistent with the article's content.
The editorial board consistently endeavors to update and expand the reviewer base.
The reviewer has no information about the author’s identity, and the author of a scientific paper has no information about who can be the reviewer of the manuscript.
At the initial stage, compliance with the technical parameters of the article is determined.
The paper may be blocked if it goes beyond the topic of law, does not comply with the mandatory technical parameters set by the Law and World, shows similarities in the Turnitin software, includes personal criticism or offensive phrases, uses hate speech or otherwise contradicts the journal’s code of ethics, has serious grammatical or linguistic errors or is inconsistent with the aims and objectives of the journal.
At this stage, one of the following decisions will be made:
The reviewer assesses the article based on the Law and the World code of ethics and makes one of the following decisions:
A positive review is given if the reviewer grants the article at least 70 points according to the evaluation form.
In case of a point lower than 70 points, the reviewer gives a negative review or gives the author a correction recommendation with specific notes and instructions.
Notes and instructions will not be provided for the articles evaluated below 50 points.
In the event of comments and instructions from the reviewer, the editorial office offers the author to consider the existing recommendations or justify his position. In case of approval, the author brings the paper into compliance with the submitted recommendations within a maximum of 2 months. The final review of the edited text is done by the same reviewer.
In the event of recommendatory review/notes, confirmation of the changes made by each co-author is required.
If the author disagrees with the reviewer’s remarks, the editorial board will review his/her reasoned opinion and then decide whether to publish or reject the article.
Compliance with technical parameters is determined within 3-4 days after receiving the article, and after successful completion, the article is forwarded to the reviewer.
The review process lasts for 10 days from the submission of the paper. In exceptional cases, it can be extended for a reasonable period based on the reviewer’s request. Based on the received review, the editors make a decision within 3-4 days.
The decision made at both stages will be promptly communicated to the author.
The average time from receiving the article to its final publication is 6-7 weeks.