Peer Review Policy

Veritas Journal of Social, Legal and Humanistic Studies (VJSLHS), published by The Global Publishers, is committed to maintaining the highest standards of scholarly excellence, fairness, transparency, and research integrity. Except for editorials, invited commentaries, and book reviews, all manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a rigorous double-blind peer review process. The journal follows internationally recognized ethical publishing standards and adheres to the principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

All submitted manuscripts are screened for originality using plagiarism detection software before entering the peer review process.

1. Double-Blind Peer Review

VJSLHS follows a double-blind peer review model to ensure an objective, fair, and unbiased evaluation of all submissions.

  • The identities of authors are concealed from reviewers.
  • The identities of reviewers remain anonymous to authors.
  • Editorial decisions are based solely on the scholarly merit, originality, methodological quality, and relevance of the submitted work.

Reviewers are expected to maintain strict confidentiality and must not use unpublished material for personal research or professional advantage.

2. Editorial and Peer Review Process

Step 1: Initial Editorial Assessment

Each manuscript is first evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief or an assigned editor to determine whether it:

  • Falls within the aims and scope of the journal.
  • Demonstrates originality and academic significance.
  • Complies with the journal's submission guidelines.
  • Meets ethical and publication standards.
  • Passes plagiarism screening.

Manuscripts that do not satisfy these requirements may be declined without external review (desk rejection).

Step 2: Reviewer Assignment

Suitable manuscripts are assigned to at least two independent expert reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research experience, publication record, and absence of conflicts of interest.

Step 3: Peer Review Evaluation

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts using criteria including:

  • Originality and contribution to knowledge.
  • Relevance to the journal's scope.
  • Theoretical, doctrinal, or methodological rigor.
  • Quality of analysis, argumentation, and interpretation.
  • Clarity, organization, and academic writing.
  • Compliance with ethical research standards.
  • Potential impact on scholarship, policy, or professional practice.

Reviewers recommend one of the following decisions:

  • Accept
  • Accept with Minor Revisions
  • Major Revisions Required
  • Reject

Step 4: Editorial Decision

The Editor-in-Chief makes the final publication decision after carefully considering reviewer reports. Where reviewer recommendations differ significantly, an additional independent review may be requested before a final decision is made.

Step 5: Revision Process

Authors requested to revise their manuscripts must submit a revised version together with a detailed response explaining how each reviewer comment has been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation where appropriate.

Step 6: Final Acceptance and Production

Manuscripts are accepted only after successfully completing peer review and satisfying all editorial, ethical, and publication requirements. Accepted manuscripts proceed to copyediting, proofreading, typesetting, author approval, and final publication.

3. Review Timeline

VJSLHS strives to provide an efficient and transparent review process.

  • Initial Editorial Assessment: Usually completed within 1–2 weeks.
  • Average Time to First Decision: Approximately 6–10 weeks.
  • Average Time from Acceptance to Publication: Approximately 2–4 weeks after final acceptance and completion of production.
  • The submission, acceptance, and publication dates are displayed with each published article.

Actual review timelines may vary depending on reviewer availability and the complexity of the manuscript.

4. Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Maintain confidentiality throughout the review process.
  • Declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest.
  • Provide objective, constructive, and evidence-based evaluations.
  • Complete reviews within the agreed timeframe.
  • Identify relevant published work not cited by the authors where appropriate.
  • Report suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, or other ethical concerns to the editorial office.

Outstanding reviewers may receive formal certificates or annual acknowledgements from the journal.

5. Editorial Independence and Ethical Oversight

Editorial decisions are made independently of the publisher and are based exclusively on academic merit, reviewer recommendations, ethical considerations, and the journal's editorial standards. Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial board members, or affiliated individuals are handled independently to avoid conflicts of interest and are subject to the same rigorous peer review process as all other submissions.

6. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision may submit a written appeal to the Editor-in-Chief, providing a detailed justification. Appeals will be evaluated objectively and may involve consultation with additional independent reviewers or editorial board members. Complaints concerning editorial processes or publication ethics are handled fairly, confidentially, and in accordance with internationally accepted ethical publishing practices.

7. Publication Ethics

VJSLHS is committed to upholding the principles of honesty, transparency, accountability, and research integrity throughout the editorial and publication process. All participants—including authors, reviewers, editors, and the publisher—are expected to adhere to the journal's ethical standards and accepted principles of responsible scholarly publishing.