Quick Navigation
Welcome
Review Process
Review Guidelines
Evaluation Form
Confidentiality
Timeline

Reviewers' Guide

Welcome and Thank You

We extend our sincere gratitude for your willingness to review a contribution for the Chokie Journal of Law (CJOL). Your expertise and insights are invaluable in maintaining the high standards of academic excellence and scholarly integrity that our journal upholds.

Confidentiality Notice: Throughout the review process, all reviewers will remain entirely anonymous to ensure unbiased and objective evaluation of all submissions.

Review Process Overview

1
Initial Screening

Manuscripts undergo internal review for scope, formatting, and basic requirements before external assessment.

2
External Assessment

Qualified reviewers evaluate the manuscript for originality, substantive interest, completeness, and quality of scholarship.

3
Decision Making

Based on reviewer recommendations, the editorial board makes final decisions regarding publication.

4
Author Revision

Authors receive constructive feedback and have the opportunity to revise their work based on reviewer comments.

Review Guidelines

Timeline: We kindly request that assessors return their comments within two weeks to ensure authors have sufficient time for revisions. Please inform the Editor-in-Chief immediately if you encounter any conflicts of interest or anticipate difficulty meeting the deadline.
Key Evaluation Criteria
A
Originality and Contribution

Assess the novelty of research, scholarship, and fresh perspectives on legal issues.

B
Research Quality

Evaluate the thoroughness of research, use of primary sources, and currentness of references.

C
Argumentation and Support

Examine the clarity of thesis statement and strength of supporting arguments.

D
Academic Integrity

Check for plagiarism issues and ensure proper citation of all sources.

Evaluation Form

Title of the Manuscript:
[Manuscript Title Will Appear Here]
1. Does the article contain novel research, scholarship, or a fresh perspective on an issue?
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
2. Did the author thoroughly research the various issues and concepts contained in the article, including primary source materials? Is the research up-to-date?
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
3. Does the author demonstrate a comprehensive knowledge of the subject matter being discussed?
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
4. Is the thesis clearly stated? Does the article address the author's thesis?
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
5. Has the author sufficiently supported his/her arguments?
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
6. Does the manuscript contain discriminatory words, abusive and sexist terms?
None
Minor Issues
Significant Issues
Severe Issues
7. Does the paper help to expand or further research in this subject area?
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
8. Does the paper help to expand methodological, theoretical and practical contribution to field of law?
Excellent
Good
Average
Poor
9. Are all relevant accompanying data, citations, or references given by the author?
Complete
Adequate
Inadequate
Poor
10. Are there plagiarism related issues?
None Detected
Suspected
Minor Issues
Major Issues
Overall Recommendation:
Accept
Minor Revisions
Major Revisions
Reject

Confidentiality and Ethics

Confidentiality Requirements:
  • Reviewers must keep all manuscript information strictly confidential
  • Do not discuss the manuscript with anyone except the editorial office
  • Do not use knowledge of the work before its publication to advance your own interests
  • Destroy or return the manuscript after review completion
Conflict of Interest: Immediately inform the Editor-in-Chief if you have:
  • Recent joint publications with the authors
  • Close personal or professional relationships
  • Financial interests in the research outcomes
  • Institutional affiliations that may create bias

Review Timeline

1
Review Assignment

Day 1: Receive manuscript and review guidelines

2
Initial Assessment

Days 1-3: Conduct initial reading and assessment

3
Detailed Evaluation

Days 4-10: Complete detailed evaluation using the provided form

4
Report Submission

Day 14: Submit completed review form to editorial office

Extension Requests: If you require additional time, please contact the Editor-in-Chief at least 3 days before the deadline to discuss an extension.

Need Assistance?

For questions about the review process or technical issues with the evaluation form, please contact our editorial team.

Contact Editorial Team Review Guidelines FAQ