Peer Review Process

Our journal employs a rigorous double-blind peer review process, ensuring precision and impartiality at every stage. The entire review process is managed through the Online Journal System (OJS), adhering to the highest standards of academic integrity.

1. Manuscript Submission
Authors submit their manuscripts via the online portal. This initial step introduces innovative contributions to the fields of Sharia and Economic Law.

2. Evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC)
The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) evaluates the manuscript to ensure alignment with the journal's scope and thematic priorities. If the manuscript meets these expectations, it is advanced to the next stage.

3. Delegation to an Section Editor (SE)
The manuscript is assigned to a Section Editor (SE) with expertise in the relevant domain. The SE oversees the review process and identifies suitable reviewers.

5. Reviewer Selection
The SE invites at least two independent reviewers to review the manuscript. This step ensures adherence to the double-blind review protocol, preserving anonymity for both authors and reviewers.

6. Reviewers' Consideration
Invited reviewers evaluate their expertise in the subject matter, declare any potential conflicts of interest, and confirm their availability to complete the review. If unavailable, they may recommend alternative reviewers.

7. Conducting the Review
Reviewers conduct a comprehensive evaluation, starting with an assessment of the manuscript's overall contribution. They then provide detailed feedback, highlighting strengths, areas for improvement, and recommendations for the manuscript's progression.

8. Editorial Deliberation
The SE consolidates the reviewers' feedback, balancing differing perspectives. If necessary, an additional reviewer may be consulted to achieve a fair and well-rounded decision.

9. Decision Communication
Authors are informed of the editorial decision (accept, revise, or reject) along with anonymous reviewer feedback. This ensures that the feedback remains unbiased and constructive.

10. Follow-up Actions

  • Accepted manuscripts move to the production stage.
  • Revisions required are returned to the authors with detailed feedback to guide improvements. Reviewers may be invited to reassess revised submissions if needed.

The entire peer review process is designed to be completed within a maximum of three months, ensuring efficiency while maintaining high-quality evaluations.