PEER REVIEW PROCESS

All submissions to Unifikasi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process to ensure the research published meets high standards of academic quality, originality, validity, and relevance. During this process, the identities of both authors and reviewers are kept confidential. Manuscripts are evaluated by independent experts in the relevant fields of law and related disciplines, in strict accordance with the journal’s scope.

The peer review procedure consists of the following stages:

 

1. Initial Evaluation (Editorial Screening)

Following submission, the editorial office conducts an initial assessment to determine whether the manuscript:

  • falls within the journal’s scope and focus;
  • complies with ethical standards and publication policies;
  • follows the journal’s formatting and referencing guidelines; and
  • meets originality requirements.

Manuscripts with a similarity index exceeding 25% will be rejected at this stage. Submissions failing to meet technical or formatting requirements will be returned to the authors for revision before peer review. Manuscripts that pass this screening are forwarded to the handling editor for reviewer assignment.

 

2. Assignment of Reviewers

Three to five independent reviewers with relevant academic expertise and research experience in the manuscript’s subject area are appointed by the editorial board. Reviewers are required to be affiliated with institutions different from those of the authors and to disclose any potential conflicts of interest.

To ensure anonymity:

  • All identifying information, including author names, affiliations, acknowledgments, and funding statements, must be removed from the main manuscript file.
  • This information is submitted separately in the title page file.

Reviewer invitations are issued by the handling editor, and the journal endeavors to complete reviewer assignment within two weeks of submission approval.

 

3. Review Process

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

  • originality and contribution to legal scholarship;
  • clarity and coherence of argumentation;
  • methodological soundness;
  • engagement with relevant national and international literature; and
  • relevance to the journal’s thematic focus.

Reviewers are normally given four weeks to complete their evaluations and provide constructive comments and recommendations, including acceptance, minor revision, major revision, or rejection.

 

4. Editorial Decision

In consultation with the handling editor, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision on each manuscript based on the reviewers’ reports, the scientific merit of the work, and the manuscript’s compliance with the journal’s editorial standards and ethical policies.

 

In cases where reviewer opinions differ substantially, the Editor-in-Chief may invite an additional independent reviewer to ensure a fair and balanced evaluation. The final editorial decision is communicated to the corresponding author through the online submission system, together with anonymized reviewer comments and, where applicable, detailed guidance for revision.

 

Possible editorial decisions include:

 

Accepted (As Is)

The manuscript is accepted without any required revisions and will be published in its original form.

 

Accepted with Minor Revisions

The manuscript is accepted for publication subject to minor revisions. Authors are requested to address small corrections or clarifications within a stipulated timeframe.

 

Accepted with Major Revisions

The manuscript may be accepted for publication provided that the authors satisfactorily address substantial revisions suggested by the reviewers and/or editors. A revised version must be submitted within the specified revision period and may be subject to further evaluation.

 

Resubmit (Conditional Rejection)

The manuscript is not accepted in its current form; however, the journal is willing to reconsider it in a new round of decision-making after the authors have made significant revisions. Resubmission does not guarantee acceptance.

 

Rejected (Outright Rejection)

The manuscript is rejected and will not be reconsidered for publication, even if major revisions are made.

 

On average:

Time from submission to first decision: approximately two month

Time from acceptance to publication: approximately three month

 

5. Revision Process

For manuscripts requiring revision:

  • authors must submit a revised manuscript with tracked or highlighted changes; and
  • a detailed response-to-reviewers (rebuttal) letter.

The standard revision periods are:

  • two weeks for minor revisions;
  • eight weeks for major revisions.

Manuscripts requiring major revisions are typically returned to original reviewers for a second evaluation, while minor revisions may be assessed directly by the editors.

6. Publication

After acceptance, the final manuscript is professionally copyedited, formatted for layout, and prepared with metadata before being scheduled for publication in the forthcoming issue.

 

This peer review system ensures that all articles published in Unifikasi: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum meet high standards of academic integrity, ethical conduct, and scholarly contribution, and that the journal consistently disseminates reliable and impactful legal research.