Reviewer Guidelines

Thank you for serving as a Reviewer for Justice Law, a peer-reviewed journal published by the Faculty of Law, Universitas Muhammadiyah Metro. Reviewers play a vital role in maintaining the quality, credibility, and integrity of scholarly publications through the Double-Blind Peer Review process.

Reviewer's Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Conduct reviews objectively, independently, and professionally.
  • Provide constructive feedback to improve the quality of manuscripts.
  • Maintain the confidentiality of all manuscripts under review.
  • Complete the review within the specified deadline.
  • Disclose any potential conflicts of interest before accepting a review assignment.
  • Decline the review if a conflict of interest may affect their impartiality.

Review Criteria

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts based on the following criteria:

1. Relevance to the Journal's Focus and Scope

Does the manuscript fall within the journal's focus and scope?

2. Originality and Novelty

Does the manuscript offer original ideas and contribute to the advancement of legal scholarship?

3. Scientific Contribution

Does the study make a meaningful theoretical or practical contribution to the field of law?

4. Research Methodology

Is the research methodology appropriate, clearly explained, and consistent with the research objectives?

5. Analysis and Discussion

Are the findings analyzed critically and supported by relevant evidence and scholarly references?

6. Conclusion

Does the conclusion accurately reflect the findings and address the research objectives?

7. References

Are the references relevant, sufficient, and up to date?

8. Quality of Writing

Is the manuscript well organized, clearly written, and compliant with the journal's author guidelines?

Review Recommendation

Reviewers are requested to recommend one of the following decisions:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

Constructive and detailed comments should accompany each recommendation to assist both the editor in making an informed decision and the authors in improving their manuscripts.

Reviewer Ethics

Reviewers must:

  • Treat all manuscripts as confidential documents.
  • Refrain from contacting the authors directly during the review process.
  • Not use unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.
  • Report any suspected plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, data falsification, citation manipulation, or other ethical concerns to the editor.
  • Evaluate manuscripts solely on their academic merit without discrimination based on nationality, institutional affiliation, gender, religion, or other personal characteristics.