• All submitted articles undergo mandatory scholarly peer review.
• The review process follows the double-blind peer review principle: neither the author nor the reviewer is informed of the other’s identity.
• Prior to peer review, each manuscript undergoes an initial technical and editorial screening to ensure compliance with the Journal’s formal requirements, scope, and principles of academic integrity.
• Following this preliminary assessment, the manuscript is assigned for review according to the subject area of the research.
• Reviewers are appointed by the Editor-in-Chief, taking into account their academic expertise, research experience in the relevant field, and the absence of any conflict of interest.
• Reviewers are selected from qualified scholars with relevant publications and professional competence in the field of international and European law.
• A reviewer must inform the Editorial Office of any conflict of interest or lack of appropriate expertise and decline the review where necessary.
• A manuscript received for review is considered a confidential document and may not be shared with third parties without the permission of the Editorial Office.
• The standard review period does not normally exceed one month, unless otherwise agreed with the Editorial Office.
• Based on the review, one of the following recommendations is issued:
– accept for publication;
– accept subject to revisions;
– reject.
• The review must provide a reasoned assessment of the manuscript’s scholarly contribution, originality, methodological soundness, use of sources, and validity of conclusions.
• Where revisions are required, the manuscript is returned to the author with reviewers’ comments. The author must submit a revised version together with a written response addressing the comments within the timeframe set by the Editorial Office.
• The revised manuscript may be submitted for an additional round of review, either to the same reviewer or to another expert.
• In cases of divergent reviewer opinions or other complex issues, the Editorial Office may appoint an additional reviewer.
• The final decision on publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief or, where necessary, by the Editorial Board.
• An article is accepted for publication upon receipt of at least two positive reviews.
• The date of acceptance is considered to be the date on which the final positive decision is formally approved by the Editorial Office.
