Responsibility of Editors
The editorial board of the International Journal of Law Management & Humanities bears ultimate responsibility for every publication decision made by the Journal. Editors are the custodians of the Journal's academic integrity, the guardians of its peer review process, and the first line of response to any allegation of misconduct. Their responsibilities are exercised in accordance with the Journal's policies and in conformity with the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
The values that guide all editorial decisions
How editorial decisions are made
The editorial board of IJLMH has the ultimate authority to decide whether a submitted manuscript is published. This authority is exercised through the Editor-in-Chief, whose decision is final and binding on all matters relating to the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript. The editorial team works collaboratively and all manuscripts are rigorously evaluated in order to maintain the academic standards of the Journal.
Publication decisions are guided by the Journal's published policies and are made solely on the basis of the manuscript's academic merit — including its originality, quality of scholarship, methodological rigour, and relevance to the Journal's scope. Decisions are not influenced by the author's identity, institutional affiliation, nationality, or professional standing.
The Editor-in-Chief has the authority to decline the publication of any manuscript — at any stage of the review process — on account of plagiarism, copyright infringement, incomplete pre-publication formalities, failure to meet the Journal's academic standards, content that is defamatory or unlawful, or any other ground consistent with the Journal's published policies. The Editor-in-Chief may also reject a manuscript after acceptance if it subsequently comes to light that a material misrepresentation was made at submission.
Where a manuscript is rejected, the editorial team provides a summary of the reasons for rejection wherever possible, to assist the author in improving their work for future submission elsewhere.
Editorial oversight of the review process
Editors are responsible for the integrity of the peer review process from the moment a manuscript is received to the moment a final decision is communicated to the author. This responsibility includes selecting appropriate reviewers, managing reviewer conduct, and ensuring that the double-blind anonymity of the process is maintained throughout.
The editorial team handles all communications with both authors and reviewers. Authors and reviewers must not contact each other directly at any stage of the review process. All queries relating to a submitted manuscript should be directed to the editorial team at submission@ijlmh.com.
Editors must recuse themselves from any manuscript in which they have a conflict of interest.
A conflict of interest arises whenever an editor has a personal, professional, financial, or institutional relationship with the authors of a manuscript, or with the subject matter of the research, that could reasonably be perceived to compromise their objectivity in making an editorial decision.
Upon identifying a conflict of interest, the editor must immediately recuse themselves from all further involvement with the manuscript and transfer responsibility for its handling to another member of the editorial team who has no conflict. The existence of a conflict of interest — and the fact that the editor has recused themselves — must be notified to the Editor-in-Chief.
Editors must not use any information, data, ideas, or arguments from an unpublished manuscript under their review for their own research, publications, or any other professional purpose — whether or not they are the handling editor for that manuscript. This obligation applies to all editorial team members and continues indefinitely after the review process is complete.
The Journal maintains a declared process for handling submissions from editorial board members or journal staff. Such manuscripts are assigned to a separate editor who has no conflict of interest, ensuring that the evaluation is objective and unaffected by any institutional relationship.
The editor's duty of confidentiality
All submitted manuscripts are confidential documents from the moment of receipt. Editors must not disclose or discuss the contents, existence, or review status of any manuscript — or the identity of its authors or reviewers — with any person outside the editorial team, except as strictly necessary for the purposes of the review process.
This obligation of confidentiality applies to: the manuscript itself and all versions of it; any reviewer reports, communications, or recommendations; all editorial correspondence with authors; and any information about the final editorial decision prior to its formal communication to the corresponding author.
The duty of confidentiality applies to all members of the editorial team — including the Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Director, Publishing Editor, Managing Editors, and Associate Editors — and continues indefinitely after the review process has concluded, whether the manuscript was accepted, rejected, or withdrawn.
Editors must maintain appropriate technical and procedural safeguards to ensure that manuscript files, review communications, and editorial correspondence are accessible only to those members of the editorial team who need to see them for the purposes of the review process.
Editor's duty to investigate and act on misconduct
Editors are obligated to take appropriate action whenever ethical concerns arise in relation to a submitted or published manuscript. This obligation applies regardless of when the concern is raised — there is no time limitation on reporting or investigating misconduct. Concerns may relate to events that occurred years before they come to the editor's attention.
When an ethical concern is raised — whether by a reviewer, a reader, a third party, or the editorial team itself — the Editor-in-Chief must assess the concern and, where it appears credible, convene an investigation committee comprising at least two editorial board members. The investigation must be conducted in accordance with the relevant COPE flowcharts and guidelines.
All parties involved in the concern — including the author(s) — must be given the opportunity to provide a response before any final decision is made. The investigation is conducted confidentially. Where the concern is substantiated, the editorial team will take the appropriate corrective action — which may include publishing a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction — and, where relevant, notifying the author's institution.
Editors must also actively monitor submitted manuscripts for signs of misconduct — including plagiarism (identified through the Turnitin and Drillbit screening process), duplicate submission, data fabrication, inappropriate authorship claims, and undisclosed conflicts of interest. Where such issues are identified at submission, the manuscript is rejected without proceeding to peer review.
How editors communicate with authors and reviewers
All communications pertaining to submitted manuscripts — with both authors and peer reviewers — are handled exclusively by the editorial team. The corresponding author is the single point of contact for all editorial communications regarding a manuscript. Editors are available to respond to queries relating to the submission and review process at submission@ijlmh.com.
Authors are notified at each stage of the review process — on receipt, on completion of initial screening, on assignment to reviewers, and on the editorial decision — by email and WhatsApp to the corresponding author's registered contact details. The status of any manuscript may also be tracked at any time via the Track Manuscript portal.
Editors provide authors with clear, constructive, and actionable feedback wherever a manuscript is rejected or a revision is requested. Where revision is requested, the editors communicate the specific changes required and the process for resubmission. Authors are given a reasonable opportunity to respond to reviewer comments and resubmit, and are notified once the revised manuscript has been received and is under assessment.
Maintaining and improving editorial quality
Editors are responsible for maintaining and continuously improving the academic quality and editorial standards of IJLMH. This includes ensuring that the Journal's policies remain current, that they reflect best practice in scholarly publishing, and that they are applied consistently to all manuscripts.
Editors are expected to familiarise themselves with and adhere to the COPE Core Practices, the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors, and all other COPE guidance relevant to their role. Where specific situations arise that are not addressed by the Journal's published policies, editors follow the COPE guidelines and flowcharts applicable to that situation.
Editors take active steps to reduce bias and promote diversity and inclusion in the peer review process — including in the selection of reviewers. The editorial board seeks to draw on a diverse range of subject-matter experts across institutions, countries, and career stages, and actively encourages reviewers from a broad range of backgrounds.
Editors support the Journal's commitment to the promotion of publication ethics among authors and the broader research community, and actively discourage misconduct in scholarly publishing.