The Andalas Law Journal is dedicated to ensuring that the peer review process is conducted with the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and fairness. Our peer review process aligns with the core practice recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), which promotes ethical standards in scholarly publishing. For more information, please refer to COPE’s homepage.

Overview of the Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to the Andalas Law Journal undergo a double-blind peer review. In this process, both the reviewers and the authors remain anonymous to each other to ensure impartiality and prevent any bias based on personal, professional, or institutional affiliations.

• Double-Blind Review: The identities of both the authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process to promote impartiality.
• Assignment of Reviewers: Each manuscript is assigned to at least two independent reviewers who have expertise relevant to the manuscript’s subject matter. Additional reviewers may be assigned if the manuscript requires specialized knowledge or further validation.
• Evaluation Criteria: Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several criteria, including originality, methodological rigour, clarity of presentation, relevance to the journal’s scope, and contribution to the field.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers play a critical role in the publication process. They are responsible for providing constructive, unbiased, and timely feedback to authors, and their evaluations are essential in guiding the editorial board’s decisions.

• Unbiased Assessment: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts solely on their academic merit, regardless of the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, citizenship, or political philosophy.
• Confidentiality: Reviewers are required to treat all manuscripts as confidential documents. They must not share or discuss the content with others except as authorized by the journal’s editorial board.
• Timeliness: Reviewers are expected to complete their reviews within the specified timeframe. If a reviewer cannot meet the deadline, they should notify the editorial office immediately.
• Constructive Feedback: Reviewers should provide detailed and constructive feedback, highlighting the strengths and areas for improvement in the manuscript. Feedback should be professional, respectful, and aimed at improving the quality of the research.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence their impartiality. If a conflict of interest is identified, the reviewers should recuse themselves from the review process.

Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are responsible for ensuring that their manuscripts meet the journal’s standards and for responding to reviewers’ feedback in a constructive manner.

• Transparency: Authors must ensure their research is presented transparently, with all relevant data, methods, and findings reported. They should also disclose any potential conflicts of interest.
• Response to Feedback: Authors are expected to address all comments and suggestions made by reviewers. If revisions are requested, authors should provide a detailed response outlining how they have addressed each point or provide a reasoned explanation if they disagree with a suggestion.
• Ethical Standards: Authors must ensure that their research complies with the journal’s ethical standards, including data integrity, authorship, and intellectual property.

Editorial Decision-Making

The Andalas Law Journal editorial board is responsible for making the final decision on the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript based on the reviewers’ evaluations and their own assessment of the manuscript’s contribution to the field.

• Decision Criteria: The editorial decision is based on the manuscript’s originality, significance, methodological soundness, and alignment with the journal’s scope. The decision-making process is transparent, and the rationale is communicated to the authors.
• Possible Outcomes: The editorial board may decide to accept the manuscript, request revisions, or reject the manuscript. In the case of revisions, the manuscript may undergo further review before making a final decision.
• Revisions and Resubmissions: If revisions are requested, authors are encouraged to resubmit their revised manuscript along with a detailed response to the reviewers’ comments. The revised manuscript may be reviewed again by the original reviewers or new reviewers, depending on the extent of the changes.

Appeals Process

If an author disagrees with the editorial decision, they have the right to appeal. The appeals process is designed to be fair and transparent.

• Appeal Submission: Authors may submit an appeal in writing to the Editor-in-Chief at alj@law.unand.ac.id within 30 days of receiving the decision. The appeal should include a detailed explanation of the grounds for the appeal.
• Appeal Review: The appeal will be reviewed by an independent panel of editorial board members who were not involved in the original decision. The appeals panel's decision is final and will be communicated to the author in a timely manner.

Transparency and Accountability

The Andalas Law Journal is committed to maintaining a transparent and accountable peer review process. The journal’s peer review policies, including criteria for reviewer selection, evaluation standards, and the decision-making process, are publicly available on the journal’s website.

For more information about the journal’s peer review processes or to provide feedback, please contact the editorial office at alj@law.unand.ac.id.