Peer Review process

Jurnal Analogi Hukum is a blind peer-reviewed and open access journal. This means that both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa, throughout the review process. Submitted papers are evaluated by anonymous referees for contribution, originality, and relevance. Reviewer selection is critical to the publication process, and we base our choice on many factors, including expertise, reputation, specific recommendations and our own previous experience of a reviewer's characteristics. We check with potential reviewers before sending them manuscripts to review. Reviewers reserves the right to reject the script if the script review didn't match to the fields/expertise. Reviewers should bear in mind that all correspondences in this journal contain confidential information, which should be treated as such.

To maintain a high-quality publication of Jurnal Analogi Hukum, all submissions undergo a rigorous review process. Manuscripts judged to be of potential interest to our readership are sent for formal review, typically to at least one reviewer, but sometimes more if special advice is needed (for example on statistics or a particular technique). The editors then make a decision based on the reviewers' advice, from among several possibilities: (1) Accept, with or without editorial revisions; (2) Invite the authors to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before a final decision is reached; (3) Reject, but indicate to the authors that further work might justify a resubmission, and; (4) Reject outright, typically on grounds of specialist interest, lack of novelty, insufficient conceptual advance or major technical and/or interpretational problems.