PUSKAPSI Law Review is a double-blind peer-reviewed scholarly journal published by the Center for Pancasila and Constitutional Studies (PUSKAPSI), Faculty of Law Universitas Jember. Reviewers play a crucial role in ensuring the academic quality, integrity, and relevance of manuscripts submitted to the journal.
These guidelines outline the responsibilities and expectations of reviewers involved in the peer review process.
Reviewers are expected to provide an objective, constructive, and timely evaluation of manuscripts within their area of expertise. The purpose of the review is to assist the editor in making an informed editorial decision and to help authors improve the quality of their manuscripts.
Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents.
Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use the content of the manuscript for personal or professional advantage.
All information related to the review process must remain confidential, even after the review is completed.
Reviewers should:
Conduct reviews fairly, objectively, and professionally.
Base their assessments solely on the academic merit of the manuscript.
Avoid personal criticism of the author(s).
Immediately notify the editor if they identify plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication, or ethical concerns.
Reviewers must decline to review a manuscript if they have a conflict of interest, including but not limited to:
Personal, professional, or financial relationships with the author(s)
Direct involvement in the research being reviewed
Competitive or collaborative relationships that could affect objectivity
Any potential conflict of interest should be disclosed to the editor as soon as possible.
Reviewers are requested to assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:
Relevance to the journal’s focus and scope (Pancasila, constitutionalism, public law, governance)
Originality and novelty of the research or argument
Clarity and coherence of structure, language, and presentation
Soundness of methodology and analytical framework
Depth and quality of legal analysis
Use of relevant and up-to-date references
Contribution to legal scholarship and practice
Reviewers are encouraged to provide:
Clear, specific, and constructive comments
Suggestions for improvement, including structure, argumentation, and references
Distinction between major issues and minor issues
Comments should be written in a professional and respectful tone and should aim to help authors strengthen their manuscripts.
Reviewers are asked to recommend one of the following decisions:
Accept without revision
Accept with minor revisions
Accept with major revisions
Reject
The final publication decision rests with the editor, taking into account all reviewer reports.
Reviewers are expected to:
Accept review invitations only if they can complete the review within the specified time frame.
Inform the editor promptly if additional time is needed or if they are unable to complete the review.
PUSKAPSI Law Review applies a double-blind peer review system. Reviewers must ensure that their comments do not reveal their identity, either directly or indirectly.
The journal values the contribution of reviewers and may acknowledge reviewer participation periodically, while maintaining confidentiality and anonymity in accordance with journal policy.