Peer Review Process

1. In order to publish the article in the journal “Law and World”, a confidential review from two reviewers is mandatory.
2. For each article, a reviewer is chosen by the chief editor, based on the consultations with the members of the editorial board.
3. A reviewer does not have information about the author of the article, whereas an author of the article does not have information about the reviewer of his/her article.
4. Reviewers are scholars from various universities worldwide, whose qualifications and academic works are totally in line with the content of the article.
5. The article is published based on two positive reviews.
6. If the article qualifies for one positive and one negative review, the article is sent to the third reviewer, whose evaluation decides the issue of the publication.
7. The process of evaluation of the article lasts for two-three weeks after receiving the article, however as an exception, the term can be continued for a reasonable time, according to the request of the reviewer.
8. A reviewer:
1. recommends publishing the article as submitted (positive review) ;
2. does not recommend publishing the article (negative review) ;
3. the article is a result of quality scientific research, however, the reviewer has important recommendations and the author is given the possibility to revise the article, according to the specified remarks and comments;
9. A review is positive if the reviewer gives an article at least 70 points, based on the form of the evaluation.
10. In case of fewer than 70 points, the reviewer provides a negative review or recommends the author to revise it, based on the specific remarks and comments.
11. If there are remarks and comments from a reviewer, the editorial board suggests the author accept the recommendations or substantiate his/her position. If the author accepts, within the period of two months, he/she revises the article according to the recommendations. The final review of the revised text is made by the same reviewer.
12. If there are recommending remarks/opinions, consent for the changes done is required from all of the peer.
13. If the author does not accept the reviewer’s remarks, his/her substantiated position is reviewed by the editorial board, which can make a decision to publish the article or to refuse to publish it.
14. The decision by the editorial board to publish the article is made based on two positive recommendations, however, this does not guarantee publication, because the final decision to publish is made by the editorial board.