The reviewers are committed to a critical, constructive and impartial review of the works and to evaluate them as quickly as possible in order to respect the deadlines.
The reviewers only review the manuscript if they think they are competent in the matter it deals with and if not, there is a conflict of interest.
The reviewers must write a complete and critical report with adequate references to the review procedure of the journal and to the public standards established by them, especially when they have to communicate that the work has been rejected. In addition, they are obliged to inform the editors of any part of the work that has been previously published or that has been revised by another publication.
The reviewers must not have a conflict of interest regarding the research that is to be published, the authors or the financing of the research.
The Editorial Committee of the Journal of Human Security and Global Law has confirmed that the article complies with the standards of style and content that are indicated in the editorial criteria, referring the article to two anonymous peer reviewers and aliens to the institution of affiliation of the author or authors, according to the double blind modality.
The assessment will take into account the interest of the article, it contributed to the knowledge of the subject it deals with, the novelties it provides, the relationships established correctly, the critical judgment that it develops, the bibliographical references used, the writing correct, etc., and will indicate recommendations, where appropriate, to achieve a possible improvement.
According to the recommendations of the reviewers, the journal editor will communicate to the author or authors the motivational result of the evaluation by electronic mail to the person who has or has used the article. The reviewers will communicate to the main author, and in a totally confidential manner, the result of the review (publication without changes, publication with minor corrections, publication with important corrections, or not advisable to publish) and the severe observations and comments on it.
If the manuscript is accepted with modifications, the author(s) shall reissue a new version of the article following the demands and suggestions of the external evaluators. The author or authors, if applicable, may also submit a letter to the Editorial Committee, in which they must indicate the content of the modifications of the article.
According to the degree of compliance with the modifications requested, the Editorial Committee is to pronounce on whether or not the publication of the article is pertinent. This decision will be communicated to the author or authors by the director of the magazine.