Lex et Praxis Journal implements a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, and academic integrity of all published research.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

All submitted manuscripts are first evaluated by the editorial team to assess:

• Relevance to the journal’s scope
• Originality and scholarly contribution
• Compliance with the author guidelines

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be rejected without proceeding to external review.

2. Plagiarism Screening

All manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection software prior to the peer review process. Submissions exceeding the acceptable similarity threshold may be rejected or returned to the authors for revision.

3. Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are reviewed by at least two independent reviewers under a double-blind peer review system, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

4. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on the following aspects:

• Originality and contribution to legal scholarship
• Identification and articulation of a clear research gap
• Relevance and significance of the research topic
• Methodological rigor and appropriateness of the research design
• Quality of legal analysis and argumentation
• Clarity, coherence, and organization of the manuscript
• Consistency between research objectives, findings, and conclusions
• Accuracy, adequacy, and currency of references and citations
• Contribution of the findings to legal theory, policy, and practice
• Compliance with ethical and academic publishing standards

5. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the editorial board may issue one of the following decisions:

• Accepted
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Rejected

6. Revision Process

Authors are required to revise their manuscripts in accordance with the reviewers’ comments within the specified timeframe. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

7. Final Decision

The final decision regarding manuscript acceptance and publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief.

8. Review Timeline

The journal aims to complete the peer review process within approximately 8–12 weeks, depending on reviewer availability and the revision process.