Guidelines for Reviewers
Guidelines for Reviewers
The Peruvian Journal of International Law uses the double-blind review process, where reviewers and authors do not know each other’s identities. Reviewers will consider criteria such as the article's contribution to scientific knowledge, relevance, and methodological coherence. The journal reserves the right of publication, and if the submitted article is accepted, style corrections and other necessary adjustments will be made to meet the publication requirements.
Submission: Articles submitted for publication will first be read and evaluated by the editor-in-chief in consultation with the Editorial Board, who will decide whether the article should proceed to the review stage, provided it aligns with the journal's thematic focus and adheres to the "Guidelines for Authors." It should be noted that at this review stage, the editorial team may contact the author to resubmit the article with the necessary revisions within 7 days. During this stage, the academic work is submitted to PlugScan by Turnitin to determine the similarity percentage and generate the corresponding report. This process may take approximately two weeks.
Review Process: In this stage, the submitted research will be examined by a blind peer reviewer specialized in the central theme of the article. The period granted for this review is approximately three weeks, depending on the length of the article. There are three possible outcomes: accepted, rejected, and accepted with modifications. In the latter case, the next step is for the reviewers’ comments and/or suggestions to be sent to the author so that the necessary modifications can be made.
Criteria for Selecting Reviewers:
Reviewers will be part of the Peruvian Journal of International Law's Arbitrator Directory and should be specialists in the journal’s research areas.
Reviews will be conducted using the double-blind method.
The acceptance or declination of an article by a reviewer must be explicit; declination will not have negative consequences for the reviewer.
Once reviewers have evaluated an article, they will be provided with a certificate accrediting the review.
Responsibilities of Reviewers:
To issue a decision on an article, reviewers must consider the following:
- Accept articles according to their specialization, knowledge, or experience on the subject.
- Send the evaluation result within 15 days of receiving the article.
- Maintain confidentiality of the evaluated manuscripts before and after the process.
- Reviewers should not contact the authors of the manuscript.
- Reviewers’ decisions will not depend on the editors' viewpoints.
- If a reviewer identifies any conflict of interest in evaluating an article, they should refrain from the arbitration and inform the general editor.
Review Decision:
After evaluating the article, reviewers can choose one of the following options:
- Accepted: if the article requires no major content changes and only needs style or minor adjustments as suggested by the reviewer.
- Accepted with revision: the text is accepted, provided it undergoes minor revisions by the editor, without needing to be resubmitted.
- Rejected: if the article cannot be published for academic reasons or if the research does not meet the editorial quality standards.
Evaluation Form:
Reviewers use the following evaluation form for their verdict.
Ethical Considerations:
- Reviewers will not express opinions based on any form of discrimination, whether political, ideological, cultural, racial, or religious.
- Reviewers may not use the information obtained from articles for personal gain.
- Reviewers may not participate in evaluating articles if they are members of the research.
- Reviewers must be constructive and clear in the comments they provide in the evaluation.
