Peer Review Process

Yuridis applies a rigorous peer review process to ensure the scientific quality, originality, and academic integrity of every published article. Publication decisions are based solely on scholarly merit, legal relevance, and contribution to the field of law.

1. Initial Review

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the Editorial Board before being sent to peer reviewers. At this stage, the Editorial Board assesses whether the manuscript:

  • Conforms to the aims, scope, and focus of Yuridis.
  • Meets the journal's submission guidelines and formatting requirements.
  • Demonstrates sufficient originality and academic contribution to the field of law.
  • Passes the similarity check using Turnitin, with a similarity index not exceeding 25%.

Manuscripts that do not meet these criteria will be returned to the author(s) immediately without proceeding to the peer review stage.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial review are subjected to a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. Each manuscript is evaluated by a minimum of two reviewers selected based on their expertise and specialization in the relevant area of law.

Reviewers are asked to assess the manuscript based on the following criteria:

  • Originality and novelty of the legal argument or research findings.
  • Scientific soundness and coherence of the methodology and legal reasoning.
  • Relevance and contribution to the development of legal studies.
  • Clarity, structure, and quality of academic writing.
  • Accuracy and completeness of citations and references.

In assigning reviewers, the Editorial Board takes responsibility for identifying and avoiding any potential conflict of interest between reviewers and authors.

3. Editorial Decision

The Editor makes the final decision on manuscript acceptance based on the comments and recommendations submitted by the reviewers. Where necessary, the Editor may consult members of the Editorial Board before reaching a final decision. Yuridis issues one of the following four decisions:

  1. Accepted -- The manuscript is accepted for publication without revisions.
  2. Accepted with Minor Revisions -- The manuscript is accepted subject to minor revisions to be completed within the stipulated timeframe.
  3. Accepted with Major Revisions -- The manuscript requires substantial revisions before a final acceptance decision can be made. Authors must resubmit the revised manuscript within the stipulated timeframe for further review.
  4. Rejected -- The manuscript is rejected on the grounds of being outside the aims and scope of the journal, containing major technical or methodological problems, lacking originality, or failing to meet the minimum standards of academic quality.

The Editor's decision is final. Authors may submit a formal written appeal if they believe the decision was made without due consideration of their work.

4. Review Timeframe

The Editorial Board is committed to conducting the peer review process efficiently without compromising academic rigor. Authors will be notified of the editorial decision within a reasonable timeframe following submission. The estimated review period is 4 to 8 weeks from the date of submission, subject to reviewer availability.

5. Reviewer Acknowledgement

Yuridis recognizes and appreciates the time, expertise, and constructive contributions of all peer reviewers. Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the quality and integrity of the journal. All reviewers are expected to maintain strict confidentiality regarding the content of manuscripts under review and must declare any potential conflict of interest prior to accepting a review assignment.