Editorial Review Policy

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.
Scroll to Top