Peer-review process

DOWNLOAD PEER-REVIEW FORM (DOCX)

In order to comply with the principles of academic respectability, ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community, a mandatory review procedure is carried out for all articles submitted to the editorial office of the Law Review of Kyiv University of Law.

The objective of the review is to facilitate the strict selection of copyright manuscripts for publishing and making specific recommendations for their improvement. The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of a scientific article, the determination of its compliance with the requirements of the journal and involves a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of article materials.

The forms of article reviewing:

  • external (reviewing manuscripts of articles by Ph.D. in Law or Dr. hab. in Law, who is a specialist in the relevant field)
  • internal (reviewing manuscripts of articles by members of the editorial board):
  1. The following issues should be covered in an external review:
  • compliance of the content of the article with the topic stated in the title;
  • compliance of the article with modern achievements in the specified field;
  • accessibility of the article to readers on which it is designed, in terms of language, style, disposition of the material, etc.;
  • the advisability of publishing an article taking into account previously published works on this issue;
  • the positive aspects, as well as the shortcomings of the article, corrections and additions to be made by the author;
  • conclusion on the possibility of publishing this manuscript in the journal.
  1. External reviews are certified in the manner prescribed by the institution where the reviewer works. The review should be signed by the reviewer with the broadened explanation of the position, academic degree and academic rank.
  2. An internal review is carried out by members of the editorial board of the journal according to the protocols of the Law Review of Kyiv University of Law. The journal uses double-blind reviewing when both reviewers do not know about each other). In addition to members of the editorial board, other domestic and foreign highly qualified specialists (mainly Dr. hab. in Law, professors) who have in-depth knowledge, relevant competence, and experience in specific scientific areas may be invited to review articles.

The review process in the collection of Law Review of Kyiv University of Law is based on the following principles:

correctness and ethics of scientific publications. The editorial board of Law Review of Kyiv University of Law provides suitable means to ensure that the review procedure supports the processes of quality improving of scientific researches, and also takes into account the requirements of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), considers the experience and follows to the best practices of leading editorial and scientific communities, helps to overcome bias and increase objectivity during the considering and publishing of submitted articles;

anonymity. The editorial board uses a double-blind peer review in its work. Authors are not informed about the names of the reviewers, reviewers are not informed of the names of the authors. The interaction between the reviewers and the authors is carried out only through the authorized members of the editorial board. The editorial staff shall not disclose to anyone information related to the manuscript (content, review process, critical remarks of the reviewers, final decision), except for the members of the editorial board of the collection, the author(s) and the reviewers themselves. Reviews are submitted only to authorized members of the editorial board of the collection and to the author(s);

openness. The reviewing processes are transparent and are carried out in the general rules for all authors and reviewers that are openly accessible on this site. The editorial board of the collection of Law Review of Kyiv University of Law provides open access (according to the policy of Open Access) to the materials of scientific articles, which have been reviewed, published and are set out on the website of Law Review of Kyiv University of Law;

immediacy. The term of the review of manuscripts of scientific articles in the collection of Law Review of Kyiv University of Law do not exceed 2 weeks.

The process of reviewing and considering of the materials of scientific articles is provided in the collection of Law Review of Kyiv University of Law according to the following rules:

  1. Manuscripts of scientific articles, which come to the editorial board, are being initially controlled on compliance with all formal requirements to the subject, scientific profile, content, structure, volume and order of design according to the Terms of Publication that are published on the Law Review of Kyiv University of Law site. In case of non-compliance with formal requirements, the materials of the articles can be immediately returned to the authors for revision in order to bring them in proper condition.
  2. Next, the manuscript of the article is checked for plagiarism.
  3. If the article does not correspond to the subject of the journal and/or to the permissible percentage of the uniqueness of the text, the author is reported about the rejection of manuscript in order to be refined.
  4. After the initial check of the manuscript of the article is finished positively and after the plagiarism control is passed, the manuscript is sent for review.
  5. In the collection of scientific papers Law Review of Kyiv University of Law a bilateral blind (anonymous) review is applied:
  • the author's / authors' personal data is not disclosed to the reviewer;
  • The author / authors are not informed about the personal data of the reviewer.
  1. 6. The reviewer estimates:
  • the urgency and importance of the scientific problem raised in the article, on the compliance of the manuscript with the subject of the collection;
  • the consistency, and the logic, the level of language proficiency when presenting the material of the article;
  • the conformity of the contents of the manuscript with its title, with selected approaches to the study and with the goals and objectives;
  • the validity of conclusions based on the results of the research and the degree of their scientific novelty;
  • the theoretical and applied value of the performed research;
  • the reliability, relevance of the data used and of the information sources;
  • the authors' compliance with the rules of scientific ethics, the correctness of references to literary sources.
  • the necessary element of the review is the reviewer's assessment of the author's personal contribution to the solving of the considered problem.
  • it is advisable to note in the review the advantages and disadvantages found in the manuscript of the article, in order to provide the author with recommendations for improvement, deepening of the study on this topic or disclosing of new aspects of the considered scientific problem.
  1. The reviewer comments on the quality of the manuscript on such items as:
  • academic novelty;
  • validity of the results;
  • - significance of the results;
  • clarity of presentation;
  • quality of design.
  1. Based on the results of an expert evaluation of scientific article, the reviewer may:
  • recommend the article to publication as-is;
  • recommend the article to publication after insignificant rework;
  • recommend the article to publication after radical rework;
  • not to recommend article to publication.
  1. If the reviewer recommends the article to publication after it’s the refinement by the author, according to the comments and proposals, the reviewer must justify the reason for such decision. To prepare the results of the review, the editorial board of the collection of Law Review of Kyiv University of Law uses the standard form of the review.
  2. Scientific articles may be referred for re-review after their radical revision, conducted on recommendations of the reviewer.
  3. Articles may be referred, if necessary, to additional review in case of acute discussion concerning the scientific results expressed in the manuscript. 
  4. In case of rejection of the publication of the article, the editors send the author a reasoned refusal.
  5. The final decision on the advisability of publication is made by the academic councils of V. M. Koretsky Institute of State and Law of the NAS of Ukraine and Kyiv University of Law of the NAS of Ukraine.

Ethical principles

The manuscripts at the stage of reviewing are strictly confidential, therefore, the reviewer should not discuss the manuscript or even refer to its existence in a conversation with third parties. In the exceptional case, when the reviewer wants to consult with a colleague on a particular issue on the manuscript, he or she informs the editor about this, and also conveys the latter that the people he addresses to are informed about the confidentiality of the materials with which they work.

Reviewers should not use the information received for personal gain.