Peer Review Process

Stage 1: Initial Evaluation

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial evaluation to determine whether it meets the journal’s submission requirements. This stage includes:

  • Submission Guidelines: Checking compliance with the journal’s author guidelines, manuscript format, and required documentation.

  • Author Declaration: Verifying the originality of the manuscript and the authors’ compliance with publication ethics.

  • Plagiarism Check: Screening the manuscript using plagiarism detection tools to assess its originality.

  • Document Completeness: Ensuring that all required sections are included, such as the title, abstract, keywords, main text, and references.

The evaluation is conducted by the Editor-in-Chief, Managing Editor, or an authorized editorial team member. Based on the results, the manuscript may be rejected or forwarded to a Handling Editor for further evaluation.

Stage 2: Handling Editor Evaluation

The Handling Editor evaluates the manuscript’s suitability for the Journal of Islamic Law and Civilization (JILC) based on the following criteria:

  • Relevance: The manuscript’s alignment with the journal’s scope and focus.

  • Argumentation: The strength, clarity, and depth of its legal arguments.

  • Originality and Contribution: The novelty and significance of its contribution to legal scholarship.

  • Methodological Rigor: The appropriateness of the research methods, including doctrinal, empirical, comparative, or other relevant legal approaches.

  • Citation Standards: Compliance with the journal’s referencing and citation requirements.

  • Academic Quality: The manuscript’s clarity, structure, and suitability for the journal’s readership.

The Handling Editor may reject the manuscript, request preliminary revisions, or forward it to external reviewers for double-blind peer review.

Stage 3: Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the editorial evaluation are sent to at least two independent reviewers through a double-blind peer review process. The identities of the authors and reviewers remain concealed throughout the review process.

Reviewers assess the manuscript based on:

  • Relevance and Originality: Its contribution to existing legal knowledge and scholarship.

  • Clarity and Structure: The logical organization and presentation of arguments.

  • Theoretical and Legal Analysis: The accuracy and depth of the analysis of legal principles, legislation, judicial decisions, and relevant scholarly literature.

  • Methodological Quality: The suitability and rigor of the research methodology.

  • References: The relevance, currency, and accuracy of citations, in accordance with the journal’s citation style, Chicago Manual of Style, 17th edition.

  • Academic Significance: The manuscript’s contribution to the development of legal studies and related disciplines.

Reviewers may recommend acceptance, minor revisions, major revisions with resubmission for further review, or rejection. The final editorial decision rests with the journal’s editorial team.

Stage 4: Post-Review Evaluation

After receiving the reviewers’ reports, the Handling Editor evaluates their recommendations and determines the appropriate next step. The manuscript may be returned to the author for revision, rejected, or considered for acceptance, depending on the reviewers’ comments and the manuscript’s academic quality.

Revised manuscripts are assessed to determine whether the authors have adequately addressed the reviewers’ comments. When necessary, the Handling Editor may send the revised manuscript for another round of peer review. At least two reviewers must evaluate the manuscript before a final decision is made.

Stage 5: Final Editorial Decision

Following the peer review process and evaluation of any required revisions, the Editor-in-Chief or an authorized member of the editorial team makes the final decision. The possible decisions are:

  • Accept: The manuscript meets the journal’s standards and is accepted for publication.

  • Minor Revisions: The author must address minor comments before final acceptance.

  • Major Revisions: Substantial revisions are required, and further evaluation may be necessary.

  • Reject: The manuscript does not meet the journal’s academic, methodological, or editorial standards.

Acceptance is determined by the manuscript’s scholarly merit and compliance with the journal’s publication standards.

Stage 6: Author Notification and Publication Costs

Authors are notified of the editorial decision through the journal’s official communication system. The  Journal of Islamic Law and Civilization (JILC) does not charge submission fees or Article Processing Charges (APCs). Submission, peer review, and publication are free of charge to authors.

Stage 7: Copy Editing

Accepted manuscripts proceed to copy editing to improve language, grammar, consistency, and adherence to the journal’s editorial style. The editorial team may contact authors to clarify information, correct errors, or resolve outstanding editorial issues. Authors are expected to cooperate with the editorial team during this stage.

Stage 8: Layout and Proofreading

The manuscript is formatted according to the journal’s publication template. The author is then given the opportunity to check the proofs and identify typographical, formatting, or factual errors. Corrections at this stage should focus on accuracy and presentation rather than introducing substantial new content.

Stage 9: Publication and Open Access

After copy editing, layout, and proofreading have been completed, the article is published online as an Open Access publication. Readers can access the published articles without subscription fees, subject to the journal’s applicable licensing and copyright policies.