1. Initial Screening
- Upon submission, all manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial board to check for:
- Relevance to the journal’s scope
- Compliance with formatting guidelines
- Plagiarism (must not exceed 10%)
- Ethical compliance
- Manuscripts that fail to meet these basic criteria may be rejected without review or sent back to the author for corrections.
2. Double-Blind Peer Review
- De Facto Law Journal follows a double-blind peer review process, where the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous.
- Each manuscript is assigned to two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant legal field.
3. Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:
✅ Originality and contribution to legal scholarship
✅ Clarity of research questions and arguments
✅ Depth of legal analysis and use of authorities
✅ Logical structure and coherence
✅ Compliance with citation and referencing standards
4. Review Timeline
- The review process generally takes 4-6 weeks, but may vary based on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.
- Authors will be informed of any delays in the review process.
5. Review Outcomes
After review, manuscripts may receive one of the following decisions:
1 Accepted without changes – Ready for publication.
2 Accepted with minor revisions – Authors must address small corrections before final approval.
3 Major revisions required – Authors must significantly revise the manuscript and resubmit it for further review.
4 Rejected – The manuscript does not meet the journal’s standards.
6. Revision & Resubmission
- Authors given revision requests must submit the revised manuscript within 2-3 weeks, along with a response letter detailing changes made.
- Failure to submit within the deadline may result in delayed publication or withdrawal of the manuscript.
7. Final Editorial Decision
- After revisions, the manuscript undergoes a final review by the editorial board to ensure all reviewer suggestions have been incorporated.
- The editorial board holds the final authority on whether the manuscript will be published.
8. Ethical Considerations
- The editorial team follows COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) guidelines.
- Any manuscript suspected of plagiarism, fabricated data, or ethical misconduct will be rejected and reported accordingly.
9. Appeals & Complaints
- If an author disagrees with a rejection or review outcome, they may file an appeal by providing justification for reconsideration.
- Appeals will be reviewed by the editor-in-chief and an independent reviewer, but decisions remain final and binding.