PEER REVIEW PROCESS

REVIEW PROCESS

1. By sending their paper for publication in the Journal, the Authors agree to the review process.
2. The Editor-in Chief and Deputy Editors-in-Chief of the the Studia Prawnicze KUL (the KUL Journal of Legal Studies) make a preliminary assessment of the submitted materials from the perspective of consistency with the Journal profile and the basic requirements concerning the research methods and content quality level.
3. Following a positive preliminary assessment referred to in Point 2, the materials to be published in sections Studies and Articles, Materials and Commentaries, and Source Materials for Legal Studies are submitted for assessment by reviewers who are independent research staff members and who are appointed separately for each individual publication. The other materials may be consulted with subject or language editors. In exceptional cases, the Editorial Team may request an expert with a doctoral degree to prepare a review.
4. Materials intended for publication in sections Studies and Articles and Materials and Commentaries are reviewed by two independent research staff members with affiliation other than that of the Editor-in-Chief's or text authors’ affiliation. As regards publications in foreign languages, where possible, at least one reviewer affiliated with a foreign institution is appointed. The Editorial Team may decide to appoint further reviewers to assess a given text, if required, in particular where the existing reviews are not consistent as to recommendation.
5. Translations of foreign laws to be published in section Source Materials for Legal Studies are reviewed by a research staff member with affiliation other than that of the Editor-in-Chief's or translation authors’ affiliation. The Editorial Team may decide to appoint further reviewers to assess a given text, if required.
6. By sending materials for review, the Editorial Board observes the principle of the double-blind review process (the authors and reviewers do not know their identities). The text author should prepare the paper for the review procedure in such a way so as to prevent the identification of authorship.
7. The reviews are prepared in writing and include explicit conclusions regarding the admission of articles/translations for publication or their rejection.
   

     The following elements are taken into account in text assessment:
   - work originality;
   - content value;
   - source base;
   - quoted literature and case law;
   - research methods.

   As regards translations of foreign laws submitted for publication in section Source Materials for Legal Studies, the following elements are taken into account:
   - the selection of translation base;
   - language correctness;
   - content-related correctness.

8. Reviewers should prepare their reviews without undue delay. The standard time limit for preparing a review is two weeks.
9. The reviewers are obliged to keep any information provided by the Editorial Board confidential and secret. The reviewers cannot use the knowledge of a given work prior to its publication.
10. Each author receives review conclusions and statement of reasons (without the reviewer's identity) with remarks, if any.
11. Reasonable and substantiated opinions presented in reviews are binding on the author of the article being reviewed, and taking them into account is prerequisite for admitting the text for publication. The author should take into account legitimate recommendations of reviewers and correct their articles accordingly; if certain recommendations are not taken into account, the authors should present and substantiate their position on the issue. If an author receives a recommendation to introduce corrections, all reviewers are entitled to verify the work again.
12. The modified texts, taking into account the reviewers’ remarks, are subject to further assessment by the Editorial Board based on the opinion of a relevant subject editor. In line with the reviewers’ suggestions, the works may also be referred to the same or other reviewers.
13. The final publication decision is made by the Editorial Team based on the analysis of remarks included in the reviews and the final version of the article provided by the author.
14. Reviewers’ names are not disclosed in individual periodical volumes. The list of cooperating reviewers is provided on the Journal website for full calendar years.