Peer Review Process

Sriwijaya Journal of International Law (SJIL) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly publishing through a rigorous, fair, transparent, and independent double-blind peer review process. Every manuscript is evaluated solely on its academic merit, originality, methodological rigor, and contribution to the advancement of international legal scholarship.

SJIL employs a double-blind peer review system, whereby the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. This approach helps ensure impartiality, minimizes bias, and promotes objective editorial decisions.

⚖ Overview of the Review Process

Every manuscript submitted to SJIL follows the editorial workflow outlined below.

Step 1 — Initial Submission

Authors submit their manuscripts through the Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform.

The Editorial Office conducts an initial administrative review to verify:

• Compliance with the journal's submission guidelines.

• Use of the prescribed manuscript template.

• Completeness of all required submission files.

• Inclusion of essential metadata and declarations.

• Adherence to ethical and formatting requirements.

Manuscripts that do not satisfy these basic requirements may be returned to the authors for technical revision before editorial evaluation.

Step 2 — Editorial Screening

The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor conducts a preliminary assessment to determine whether the manuscript:

• Falls within the journal's aims and scope.

• Demonstrates originality and scholarly significance.

• Presents a clear research question and legal argument.

• Meets acceptable standards of academic writing.

• Offers a meaningful contribution to international legal scholarship.

Manuscripts that fail to satisfy these criteria may receive a desk rejection without being sent for external peer review.

Step 3 — Plagiarism Screening

All manuscripts are screened using professional plagiarism detection software before entering peer review.

The Editorial Office evaluates similarity reports to identify potential concerns, including:

• Plagiarism.

• Self-plagiarism.

• Duplicate or redundant publication.

• Inappropriate citation practices.

• Other forms of publication misconduct.

Where necessary, authors may be asked to provide clarification or revise the manuscript before further consideration.

Step 4 — Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the editorial screening are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers with relevant expertise.

During the review process, neither the authors nor the reviewers are informed of each other's identities.

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:

• Originality and scholarly contribution.

• Relevance to the journal's aims and scope.

• Soundness of legal reasoning and research methodology.

• Engagement with relevant legal authorities and academic literature.

• Quality of legal analysis and argumentation.

• Organization, clarity, and academic writing.

• Overall significance to the field of international law.

Reviewers are expected to provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based comments to assist both the editors and the authors.

Step 5 — Review Recommendations

Following their evaluation, reviewers normally recommend one of the following editorial outcomes:

• Accept

• Minor Revision

• Major Revision

• Reject

The reviewers' recommendations are advisory and support the editorial decision-making process.

Step 6 — Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors are expected to submit:

• A revised version of the manuscript.

• A detailed Response to Reviewers explaining how each comment has been addressed.

Where appropriate, revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation before a final decision is made.

Failure to submit revisions within the specified timeframe may result in withdrawal of the manuscript from the editorial process.

Step 7 — Final Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision after considering:

• The reviewers' reports.

• The quality of the revised manuscript.

• The authors' responses to reviewer comments.

• Compliance with the journal's editorial and ethical standards.

Possible final decisions include:

• Accept for Publication

• Accept with Minor Editorial Revisions

• Request Further Revision

• Reject

The Editor-in-Chief's decision is final.

Step 8 — Copyediting and Publication

Accepted manuscripts proceed through the production process, which includes:

• Professional copyediting.

• Language editing where appropriate.

• Proofreading.

• Layout and typesetting.

• Author proof approval.

• Final publication in SJIL.

Authors are provided with page proofs to review before publication to ensure the accuracy of the final published version.

⚖ Principles of Peer Review

SJIL is committed to conducting peer review in accordance with internationally recognized standards of publication ethics.

The review process is guided by the following principles:

• Fairness — manuscripts are evaluated solely on academic merit.

• Objectivity — editorial decisions are free from personal bias.

• Confidentiality — manuscript information is protected throughout the review process.

• Independence — reviewers provide impartial scholarly assessments.

• Integrity — ethical standards are maintained at every stage of editorial evaluation.

• Transparency — editorial procedures are clearly communicated to authors.

⚖ Commitment to Excellence

SJIL recognizes peer review as the foundation of high-quality scholarly publishing. By combining rigorous editorial screening, independent expert evaluation, and adherence to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) principles, the journal strives to ensure that every published article makes a meaningful, reliable, and original contribution to the advancement of international legal scholarship.

SJIL is committed to providing authors with a professional, constructive, and timely review process while maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and editorial excellence.

SJIL is committed to a fair, objective, and confidential review process. Editorial decisions are made solely on the basis of academic merit, originality, relevance to the journal’s scope, and the quality of legal analysis, regardless of the authors’ nationality, institutional affiliation, or professional position.