Peer Review Process

Publication of articles in the Riau Journal Law Review depends solely on scientific validity and coherence, as assessed by our editors and/or peer reviewers, who will also evaluate whether the writing is understandable and whether the work makes a useful contribution to the field. Riau Journal Law Review acknowledges the efforts and suggestions made by its reviewers.

Initial Manuscript Evaluation
The editor will first evaluate all submitted manuscripts. Although it is rare, it is possible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Manuscripts rejected at this stage are not sufficiently original, have serious scientific weaknesses, or fall outside the aims and scope of the Journal of Law, Humanities and Politics (JIHHP). Those that meet the minimum criteria are forwarded to the reviewer team for further review.

Type of Peer Review
Submitted manuscripts will generally be reviewed by two to three experts who will be asked to assess whether the manuscript is scientific and reasonable, whether it duplicates previously published work, and whether it is sufficiently clear for publication. The method used is blind peer review.

Review Reports
Reviewers are asked to evaluate the following: validity, errors (in terminology or procedure), experimental design, methodology used in the reported research, significance and importance of the findings, originality and implications in the field, missing or inaccurate references, whether the results/findings are clearly presented and support the conclusions, and whether the manuscript follows appropriate ethical guidelines.

Reviewers are not expected to correct or copy-edit the manuscript. Language correction is not part of the peer review process.