International Islamic University Malaysia

REVIEWER GUIDE

Double-blind peer review process

IIUM Law Journal follows a double-blind peer-review process, whereby authors do not know reviewers and vice versa.

 

What is expected from reviewers

Reviewers are expected:

  • To critically comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript;
  • To provide the author with useful suggestions for its improvement; and
  • To specifically indicate point by point any corrections or revisions to be made by the author in order for the manuscript to be accepted for publication.

 

Confidentiality

The submitted manuscript is a privileged communication; reviewers must treat it as confidential. It should not be retained or copied. Reviewers must not share the manuscript with any other people whatsoever.

 

Publication Ethics

Plagiarism is an unacceptable violation of publication ethics. The journal’s editors and reviewers are the primary means of detecting plagiarism in manuscripts. If reviewers suspect misconduct, they should notify the editor in confidence, and should not share their concerns with other parties.

 

Timeliness

Timeliness is the most crucial quality of reviewers. If a reviewer cannot meet the deadline given, he should contact the editor as soon as possible to determine whether the time should be extended or a new reviewer should be chosen. Typically, the time to complete the review is three (3) weeks.

 

Peer-review process

  • Two reviewers independently evaluate the quality of the submitted manuscripts. In case of a tie in their recommendations a third reviewer may be assigned.
  • Reviewers are required to send back to the editor the revised version of the manuscript together with the completely filled “Manuscript Review Form”.
  • To ensure double-blind peer review, it is very important for reviewers to remove their names or any information about them from the reviewer’s version of the manuscript, especially when review is made through “track changes”.
  • Reviewers’ comments and reviewers’ version of the manuscript are forwarded to the author.
  • The author does the necessary corrections and revisions and submits a revised version of the manuscript to the editor, along with a point by point description of how they have answered the comments and concerns of the reviewers by filling the “Author’s Response to Reviewers Form”.
  • The editor again sends the revised manuscript out for review. Typically, at least one of the original reviewers will be asked to examine the revised version of the article.
  • The editor examines the reviews and decides whether to accept the manuscript, invite the author to revise and resubmit, or reject the manuscript.
  • Final acceptance or rejection rests with the editorial board who reserves the right to refuse any material for publication.
  • Although the manuscript is judged as acceptable for publication on the basis of content, the editor reserves the right to modify the typescripts to eliminate ambiguity and repetition and for clarity purpose. However, the final proof-reading will be done and confirmed by the author.

 

Reviewers’ incentive

Apart from the acknowledgement of our valued reviewers as experts in their respective specialized areas of law, an honorarium of RM 150 (or its equivalent) per manuscript will be paid as a token of appreciation.

 

 



Print ISSN : 0128-2530

Online ISSN : 2289-7852



Creative Commons License
IIUM Law Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.