Peer Review Process

Journal RATIO JURIS LAW REVIEW implements a double-blind peer review system as a mechanism to ensure scholarly quality, objectivity, and academic integrity in every article published. Every submitted manuscript must follow the Author Guidelines established by the journal. The peer review process consists of several stages as follows:

1. Initial Editorial Screening (Initial Review by the Editor)

After a manuscript is submitted through the OJS system, the Editor conducts an initial evaluation to assess:

  • The relevance of the topic to the journal's focus and scope
  • Compliance with the author guidelines
  • Administrative completeness (metadata, abstract, references)
  • Novelty and relevance of the topic

At this stage, the manuscript will also be checked using plagiarism detection software (Turnitin or similar tools).

Similarity index policy:

  • A maximum of 25% overall similarity
  • No high similarity from a single dominant source
  • No substantial plagiarism

Manuscripts that do not align with the journal’s focus or have a high similarity index will be returned (desk rejection) to the author without proceeding to the review stage.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening will be sent to at least two independent reviewers who have expertise in the relevant field.

In the double-blind review system:

  • The identity of the authors is concealed from the reviewers
  • The identity of the reviewers is concealed from the authors

Reviewers will evaluate the manuscript based on the following aspects:

  • Originality and novelty
  • Significance and contribution to the development of Constitutional Law and/or Administrative Law
  • Appropriateness of the research methodology
  • Depth of analysis and argumentation
  • Quality of references and relevance of literature
  • Clarity of structure and presentation

The Editor is responsible for ensuring that there is no conflict of interest in the reviewer assignment process.

3. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' recommendations, the Editor will make the final decision with the following categories:

  • Accepted without revision
  • Accepted with minor revision
  • Accepted with major revision
  • Rejected

If revisions are required, the author must revise the manuscript according to the reviewers’ comments within the specified timeframe. The revised manuscript may be sent back to the reviewers for further evaluation if necessary.

The final publication decision rests entirely with the Editor based on academic considerations and reviewers’ recommendations.

4. Copyediting and Publication

Manuscripts that are accepted will proceed to the following stages:

  • Copyediting
  • Layout editing
  • Proofreading

Before being published online in the Open Access system.

5. Estimated Review Process Duration

The average review process takes between 4 to 8 weeks, depending on the complexity of the manuscript and reviewer responsiveness. Through this system, Journal RATIO JURIS LAW REVIEW is committed to maintaining high scholarly standards, transparency in the editorial process, and academic integrity in public law publications.