Peer Review Process

Peer Review Process

The International Journal of Advanced Research in Humanities and Law (IJREL) follows a rigorous and transparent double-blind peer-review process to ensure the academic quality, originality, and integrity of published research.

The identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the peer-review process.

1. Initial Editorial Assessment

All submitted manuscripts are first reviewed by the editorial office to determine whether they:

  • Fit the aims and scope of IJREL

  • Meet the journal's basic submission requirements

  • Present sufficient academic and scholarly quality

  • Follow the journal's ethical and publication policies

  • Meet the required standards of originality and academic integrity

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's basic requirements or fall outside its scope may be rejected at this stage without external peer review.

2. Plagiarism and Research Integrity Screening

Submitted manuscripts may be screened for plagiarism, excessive text similarity, duplicate publication, and other potential research or publication integrity concerns.

Where significant concerns are identified, the journal may request clarification or additional information from the authors or take appropriate editorial action in accordance with the journal's publication ethics policies.

3. Reviewer Selection

Manuscripts considered suitable for peer review are assigned to qualified independent reviewers with appropriate expertise in the subject area of the manuscript.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic expertise, research experience, and suitability for evaluating the submitted work.

The journal seeks to avoid assigning reviewers who have a conflict of interest with the authors, institutions, or research presented in the manuscript.

4. Double-Blind Review

IJREL uses a double-blind peer-review process.

Under this model:

  • Reviewers do not know the identities of the authors.

  • Authors do not know the identities of the reviewers.

  • Reviewers are expected to maintain the confidentiality of the manuscript and the review process.

Authors should therefore ensure that their submitted manuscripts do not unnecessarily reveal their identity or institutional affiliation within the blinded manuscript file.

5. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on relevant academic and scholarly criteria, including:

  • Originality and significance of the research

  • Relevance to the journal's aims and scope

  • Clarity of the research objectives

  • Academic and theoretical contribution

  • Appropriateness of the methodology

  • Quality of analysis and interpretation

  • Use and relevance of scholarly literature

  • Quality and accuracy of references

  • Organization and clarity of presentation

  • Ethical compliance

  • Overall contribution to the relevant field

Reviewers may also provide specific comments and recommendations for improving the manuscript.

6. Reviewer Recommendations

Following evaluation, reviewers may recommend one of the following outcomes:

  • Accept

  • Minor Revision

  • Major Revision

  • Reject

Reviewer recommendations are advisory. The final editorial decision is made by the journal's editorial team after considering the reviewers' comments and the overall quality and suitability of the manuscript.

7. Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to carefully address the reviewers' comments and submit a revised version within the timeframe specified by the editorial office.

Authors may be asked to provide a response explaining how the reviewers' comments have been addressed.

A revised manuscript may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

8. Final Editorial Decision

The final decision regarding publication is made by the editorial team based on the manuscript's academic quality, relevance, ethical compliance, reviewer recommendations, and the quality of any requested revisions.

Possible editorial decisions include acceptance, revision, or rejection.

Submission of a manuscript and completion of peer review do not guarantee publication.

9. Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to IJREL are treated as confidential documents.

Reviewers must not:

  • Share the manuscript with unauthorized individuals

  • Use unpublished information for their own research or personal advantage

  • Disclose information about the manuscript or review process

  • Contact the authors directly regarding the manuscript

Reviewers should provide objective, professional, and constructive feedback.

10. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that could affect their ability to provide an impartial evaluation.

A reviewer should decline the assignment if they have a significant personal, professional, institutional, financial, or academic conflict with the authors or the submitted research.

11. Timeliness

IJREL asks reviewers to complete their evaluations within the timeframe communicated by the editorial office.

If a reviewer is unable to complete a review within the requested period, they should notify the editorial office as soon as possible.

The journal may appoint an alternative reviewer when necessary to avoid unnecessary delays.

12. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are based on the scholarly quality, originality, relevance, and ethical standards of the submitted manuscript.

The journal does not guarantee acceptance based on an author's institution, academic position, nationality, personal relationships, or previous publication record.

13. Appeals

Authors who believe that an editorial decision resulted from a significant factual, procedural, or technical error may submit an appeal to the editorial office.

Appeals are considered in accordance with the journal's Complaints and Appeals Policy.

14. Post-Publication Review

Peer review does not end the journal's responsibility for maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record.

If substantial concerns regarding a published article are subsequently identified, IJREL may investigate the matter and, where appropriate, publish a correction, clarification, expression of concern, or retraction in accordance with its publication ethics policies.

15. Publication Ethics

IJREL is committed to maintaining high standards of research and publication ethics throughout the editorial and peer-review process.

The journal follows recognized principles of publication ethics and takes appropriate measures to address concerns relating to plagiarism, fabrication, falsification, conflicts of interest, authorship, peer-review manipulation, and other forms of research or publication misconduct.

For questions concerning the peer-review process, please contact:

Email: editor@ijrelpub.com