The reviewing of all articles published in the Journal is an obligatory procedure. The reviewing allows to comply with the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community and to prevent any violations of these rules in personal work as well as in relations with all participants of the science publication process.
Articles received by the editorial office and meet the formal criteria are considered at editorial board meeting for correspondence to the Journal’s profile and to determine the range of reviewers.
All articles that correspond to the Journal’s profile are send for double-blind peer review. Reviewing can be performed by editorial board members and outside experts, who determine the development of scientific thought, have their own scientific schools and followers in Russia and abroad, who made a significant contribution in different areas of law science, and highly cited in academic circles university experts who have been published in relevant subject areas.
Reviewer evaluates:
Whether the article corresponds to the scientific journal specialization, whether the article’s content corresponds to the article’s topic.
The relevance of the topic.
Whether the article has the scientific problem statement.
Consideration of what problem makes the content of the article.
Whether the author is suggesting something new, scientific innovation.
Whether research results are convincing, and presentation of the material is logical.
Whether research results corresponds to initial scientific problem statement.
Terminological unambiguity.
Author’s knowledge of scientific literature about discussed issues, including international experience.
Particular qualities of authors writing style and language (if the article’s language and style is apprehensible, the necessity of additional scientific and literary editing, etc.)
The review should contain specific conclusions:
Whether it would be beneficial to publish the article taking into account previous publications and researches on the matter
Pluses and minuses of the article as well as what the author should change or add to the article
The final qualification for publishing must be either ‘Recommended’ or ‘Recommended for publishing provided that the author eliminates the minuses pointed out by the reviewer’ or ‘Not recommended’.
The review is to be in printed form; it is to be signed by the reviewer and certified with a seal of his\her affiliating institution.
The expert returns his review to the Editorial Board within 15 days. The review provides his recommendations on accepting or rejecting the manuscript for publication.
The reviews on the received materials are sent to authors by e-mail.
If the manuscript is not accepted for publication the Editorial Board sends the author its motivated refusal.
The article which is not recommended for publishing cannot be considered again.
A positive review on the article is not a sufficient condition for its publication. The editorial board takes a final decision on reasonability of publishing.
After the article is admitted for publication, the editorial board informs the author about this fact and specifies the publication date.
The review’s originals are kept in the editorial office for 5 years.
Treatment of manuscripts
Manuscripts are accepted according to the following schedule:
for № 1 (March) — deadline: January 1 of the current year;
for № 2 (June) — deadline: April 1 of the current year;
for № 3 (September) — deadline: July 1 of the current year;
for № 4 (December) — deadline: October 1 of the current year;
The articles are accepted for consideration provided that they conform to the requirements for the authors’ editions and are accompanied with the supporting documents.
The executive secretary notifies the authors of receiving the articles within 14 days by e-mail, checks for compliance with formal criteria and conducts a check for text originality using the “Anti-Plagiarism” system. The executive secretary corresponds with authors about making corrections if necessary. After corrections are made, the executive secretary refers the articles to Chief (Research) Editor and to the editorial board of the Journal.
The editorial board considers received articles. The editorial board determines whether the article corresponds to the Journal’s profile. Articles that meet the formal requirements are sent for reviewing. The editorial board informs authors about results of reviewing. Information about the plan of publishing authors report after consideration of articles peer-reviewed at the regular meeting of the editorial board.
The Editorial Board has a right to reject an article if it does not meet the requirements or does not fit the scope of the Journal.
The editorial board sends a reasoned refusal to an author if his/her article was not accepted for publishing.
The editorial board determines whether the article corresponds to the journal’s profile. Then, the article is sent for compulsory reviewing. (review procedure for manuscripts submitted).
The Editorial Board has a right to do scientific and literary editing of an article, shorten it (subject to agreement by the author) or, if the topic of the article is interesting for the Journal, return it to the author for revision.
The Editorial Board does not discuss its decisions with the authors of rejected manuscripts, manuscripts are not returned.
