Peer review is the independent evaluation of research work by experts in the areas of International Law and International Relations. The purpose of peer review is to assess the quality of the article and its suitability for publication.

Peer review serves as a quality control mechanism for academic journals and provides valuable feedback for authors. Comments can be used to improve the article before publication.

Thus, peer review can be seen as a collaborative process, where authors engage in dialogue with their peers in the field and receive constructive support to advance their work.

The double-blind peer review process begins when a researcher or researchers submit an authored article for publication in the journal. Then, the editor, together with a member of the International Scientific Committee, conducts an initial reading of the article to see if it fits the journal's content.

If the article passes this phase, the editor selects reviewers who are experts in the same field as the author(s), hence they are called peers. Reviewers are also referred to as referees because they make judgments about the quality of the article.

As mentioned earlier, the journal uses a double-blind peer review process where referees do not know the identity of the authors, and the authors do not know the identity of the referees. For the total number of articles in each issue, between 5 and 10 referees will be used.

For each article, three referees will be assigned based on topics and specialties. Referees are mostly external academics and researchers with recognized prestige in their field at both national and international levels.

Referees evaluate the article based on its quality, methodology, potential bias, ethical issues, and any other factors that may affect the research. For the evaluation and judgment of each article, referees will use a review form that includes prioritized criteria and corresponding scores.

The result of the arbitration can be:

For articles to be published under the arbitration result scheme 1 and 2, i.e., (1) Accepted without modifications or with minor modifications, (2) Conditional upon revision and resubmission within 30 days, a majority of 2-1 is required, meaning it will be sufficient if two referees are in favor of publishing the article. Similarly, for articles to be rejected, a majority of 2-1 will suffice, meaning if two referees reject the article's publication.

For articles requiring modifications, once authors return the corrected version, it will be sent to the referee who gave the most unfavorable judgment to verify that the observations have been addressed and to approve the publication. At this stage, the referee cannot request additional modifications beyond those appearing in the judgment.

To perform their work, referees will receive a version of the article to be evaluated, the instructions provided to the authors, and the reviewer evaluation form that must be used. The Editor maintains contact with the referees and prepares a list of accepted and rejected articles, which, along with the judgments, must be sent to the Editorial Board.