Reviewing Procedure

All scientific articles submitted to the editorial board of the journal are subject to mandatory double-blind review (the reviewer does not know the authors of the manuscript, the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers). The manuscripts are sent to two reviewers for evaluation.

Articles are reviewed by members of the editorial board and the editorial board, as well as invited reviewers, leading experts in the relevant field of law. The decision on the choice of a reviewer to review an article is made by the editor-in-chief and responsible editors.

Each reviewer has the right to withdraw from a review if there is a clear conflict of interest affecting the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Based on the results of the review of the manuscript, the reviewer makes recommendations on the future of the article (each decision of the reviewer is justified):

• The article is recommended for publication in its present form;
• The article is recommended for publication after correcting the shortcomings noted by the reviewer.;
• The article needs additional review by another specialist.;
• the article cannot be published in the journal.

If the review contains recommendations for correcting and finalizing the article, the editorial board sends the author the text of the review with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the article or to refute them (partially or completely). The revision of the article should not take more than 1 month from the moment of sending an e-mail to the authors about the need to make changes. The article revised by the author resends.

If the authors refuse to finalize the materials, they must notify the editorial board in writing or orally of their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version after 1 month from the date of sending the review, even if there is no information from the authors with a refusal to finalize the article, the editorial board removes it from the register. In such situations, an appropriate notification is sent to the authors about the withdrawal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the deadline for revision.

If the author and the reviewers have unresolved contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.

The decision to refuse publication of the manuscript is made at the editorial board meeting in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article that is not recommended for publication by the editorial board's decision will not be accepted for reconsideration. A notice of refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail. After the editorial board decides to allow the article to be published, the assistant editor-in-chief informs the author about it and specifies the publication date.

The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient reason for the publication of the article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.

The original reviews are kept in the editorial office of the journal for 5 years.