Review Policy

All articles which were sent to the editorial board and meet journal requirements are to be reviewed. Review is meant to impartially evaluate content of the scientific article highest possible and check if it meets journal requirements. It stipulates full-scale analysis of advantages and disadvantages of the article materials. Only articles valuable in science terms and addressing the relevant issues and tasks of state and law formation shall be published.

All submissions which the editorial board receives are sent to two reviewers according to research profile. The editor-in-chief appoints reviewers. Pursuant to the journal chief editors decision particular articles of prominent scientists and specially invited articles may be released skipping the standard review.

The members of the editorial board of the scientific journal as well as independent scientific professionals may review the articles. The latter shall have deep insight and working experience in particular research area.

Review is carried out confidentially according to double-blind review (when neither author nor reviewer knows each other). The editor-in-chief of the journal shall coordinate work of an author and the reviewers.

The reviewers have to submit their conclusion with recap recommendation on the article to the editorial board within 14 days after they receive it. They may advise an author to revise the article to some extent. In such case the author shall receive the article back with recommendations to consider remarks when they update the article or they may argue against such recommendations. The author shall send revised article and covering letter which contains answers to remarks and the changes made in the article. The reviewer receives revised variant to make decision and prepare conclusion whether the articles will be published or not.

The reviewers shall be informed that received submissions are authors intellectual property and shall not be subject to disclosure. The reviewers are forbidden from making duplicates of the received articles and using their materials prior to publication.

Review is carried out in confidentiality and thus information on the article (timescales, content, stages and details of the review, reviewers remarks and final decision on publication) shall be disclosed only to the authors and reviewers. The present requirement may be breached only if there is evidence or petition on unreliability or falsification of the article materials. In any case, the author of the reviewed article may read and acknowledge the review, in particular, if they dont agree with the reviewers conclusions.