Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

The Pakistan Journal of Law and Policy follows a double-blind peer-review process for scholarly manuscripts that pass the journal's initial editorial screening. The journal is committed to ensuring that manuscripts are evaluated fairly, objectively, and in accordance with recognized standards of academic integrity, publication ethics, and scholarly excellence.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Under the double-blind peer-review system:

• The identities of authors are not disclosed to reviewers during the review process.

• The identities of reviewers are not disclosed to authors.

• Review reports are provided to authors without identifying information, subject to the journal's applicable editorial procedures.

• Authors and reviewers are expected to avoid including information in manuscripts or review reports that could unnecessarily reveal their identities.

The purpose of double-blind peer review is to minimize the potential influence of personal, institutional, professional, or other biases and to ensure that manuscripts are assessed primarily on the basis of their originality, legal accuracy, analytical depth, methodological soundness, relevance, and contribution to legal scholarship and policy discourse.

Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial editorial assessment to determine whether they fall within the scope of the Pakistan Journal of Law and Policy, comply with the journal's basic submission requirements, and demonstrate sufficient scholarly merit to proceed to external peer review.

The editorial screening may consider the relevance of the manuscript to law and public policy, originality, academic quality, appropriate structure and referencing, compliance with publication-ethics requirements, and the presence of substantial unattributed or improperly reproduced material.

The editorial team may reject manuscripts at this stage where they fall outside the journal's scope, fail to meet essential submission requirements, lack sufficient scholarly merit, or raise significant ethical concerns.

External Peer-Review Process

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are normally sent to at least two independent reviewers with appropriate expertise in the relevant area of law, legal theory, jurisprudence, public policy, or another subject addressed by the manuscript. Additional reviewers may be appointed where specialist expertise is required or where the initial reports differ substantially.

Reviewers may be asked to assess, as applicable:

• Originality and contribution to legal scholarship and policy research;

• Relevance to the scope and objectives of the journal;

• Clarity and significance of the research question, objectives, and argument;

• Accuracy of legal analysis and interpretation;

• Appropriate use and interpretation of legislation, judicial decisions, case law, treaties, regulations, and other legal authorities;

• Methodological or analytical soundness, including the suitability of doctrinal, comparative, empirical, or interdisciplinary approaches;

• Quality and adequacy of supporting evidence, data, citations, and references;

• Engagement with relevant national and international scholarly literature;

• Clarity, organization, coherence, and academic presentation;

• Compliance with research integrity and publication-ethics standards; and

• Whether the manuscript contains substantial unattributed, plagiarized, or improperly reproduced material.

Reviewers provide substantive comments and recommendations to assist the authors and editorial team. A favorable recommendation from reviewers does not, by itself, constitute acceptance for publication.

Editorial Decisions

The final decision regarding publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief and/or the authorized editorial team. Decisions may include:

• Acceptance for publication;

• Acceptance subject to minor revisions;

• Major revisions followed by further editorial assessment or peer review;

• Invitation to revise and resubmit; or

• Rejection.

Editorial decisions take into account the reviewers' reports, the manuscript's scholarly quality, originality, legal accuracy, relevance, ethical compliance, and suitability for the journal.

Where revisions are requested, authors are expected to respond to the reviewers' comments and address the concerns identified by the editorial team. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers or assessed by the editorial team, depending on the nature and extent of the revisions.

The journal reserves the right to reject a manuscript where the required revisions are not adequately addressed or where significant scholarly, legal, or ethical concerns remain unresolved.

Reviewer Confidentiality and Independence

Reviewers must treat submitted manuscripts and all materials associated with the peer-review process as confidential. They must not disclose, reproduce, distribute, or use unpublished information obtained through peer review for personal, professional, commercial, or academic advantage.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, evidence-based assessments and to disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest. They should decline a review assignment where such a conflict could reasonably compromise, or appear to compromise, their independent judgment.

The editorial team will take appropriate measures to safeguard the confidentiality, impartiality, and integrity of the peer-review process.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for submitting original work that complies with the journal's submission requirements, research-integrity standards, and publication-ethics policies. Manuscripts must accurately acknowledge sources, properly cite legal authorities, and disclose relevant conflicts of interest and other information required by the journal.

Authors must respond to editorial decisions and revision requests professionally and within the specified timeframe. Where reviewers identify errors or weaknesses, authors should address the comments carefully and provide a reasoned explanation where they disagree with a recommendation.

Review Integrity and Publication Ethics

The Pakistan Journal of Law and Policy does not guarantee acceptance of any manuscript solely on the basis of submission, revision, or a favorable reviewer recommendation. Editorial decisions are made independently and must not be influenced by personal relationships, institutional affiliations, financial considerations, or other inappropriate factors.

The journal may investigate concerns relating to plagiarism, fabricated or falsified research, citation manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest, or other potential breaches of publication ethics in accordance with its applicable policies.

Policy Review

This policy may be reviewed and updated periodically to reflect developments in legal scholarship, scholarly publishing, peer-review practices, and recognized international standards of publication ethics.

By submitting a manuscript to the Pakistan Journal of Law and Policy, authors acknowledge their responsibility to comply with this policy and the journal's other applicable editorial and publication-ethics requirements.