Peer Review Policy

The Indonesian Journal of Feminist Legal Studies (IJFLS) is committed to maintaining the highest standards of academic quality, integrity, and ethical publishing. To ensure the publication of high-quality scholarly work, the journal employs a double-blind peer review process, in which the identities of both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial evaluation by the Editorial Office and the assigned Editor. During this stage, the manuscript is assessed to determine whether it:

  • Falls within the journal's focus and scope;

  • Complies with the journal's submission guidelines and formatting requirements;

  • Meets basic standards of academic quality, originality, and clarity;

  • Demonstrates ethical compliance, including originality and the absence of plagiarism.

Manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be returned to the authors for revision before peer review or rejected without external review.

Double-Blind Peer Review

Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial assessment are sent for double-blind peer review to at least three independent experts with relevant expertise in the subject area. Neither the authors nor the reviewers are informed of each other's identities, ensuring an impartial and unbiased evaluation.

Reviewers are invited to assess the manuscript based on several criteria, including:

  • Originality and novelty;

  • Relevance to the journal's focus and scope;

  • Theoretical and methodological rigor;

  • Quality of analysis and discussion;

  • Contribution to legal scholarship and feminist legal studies;

  • Clarity, organization, and academic writing;

  • Adequacy of references and supporting literature;

  • Compliance with research and publication ethics.

Each reviewer provides detailed comments and one of the following recommendations:

  • Accept without revision;

  • Accept with minor revisions;

  • Reconsider after major revisions;

  • Reject.

Editorial Decision

The Editor considers the reviewers' reports collectively before making an editorial decision. When reviewer recommendations differ significantly, the Editor may invite an additional reviewer or consult members of the Editorial Board before reaching a final decision.

The final decision on manuscript acceptance rests solely with the Editor and is based on the reviewers' evaluations, the authors' responses to reviewer comments, and the journal's editorial standards.

Revision Process

Authors receiving revision requests are expected to submit a revised manuscript accompanied by a detailed response letter addressing each reviewer comment. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

Publication Ethics and Confidentiality

All manuscripts are treated as confidential documents throughout the editorial and peer review process. Editors and reviewers are expected to uphold the highest standards of publication ethics by maintaining confidentiality, declaring any potential conflicts of interest, and providing objective, constructive, and timely evaluations as regulated by COPE Standard and other international standard.