Review Policy

1. All articles that have been submitted to the editorial board and meet the journal's profile are reviewed. The review procedure is focused on the most objective assessment of the content of a scientific article, determining its compliance with the journal's requirements, and provides for a comprehensive analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of the article's materials. Only those articles that are valuable from a scientific point of view and contribute to solving current problems and tasks of statehood and lawmaking are accepted for publication.

2. All manuscripts submitted to the editorial board are sent to two reviewers according to the research profile. The reviewers are appointed by the editor-in-chief. By decision of the Editor-in-Chief of the journal, individual articles by prominent scientists, as well as specially invited articles, may be exempted from the standard review procedure.

3. To review articles, reviewers may be either members of the editorial board of the scientific journal or external highly qualified specialists who have deep professional knowledge and experience in a specific scientific field.

4. Reviewing is conducted confidentially according to the principles of double-blind review (two-way «blind» review, when neither the author nor the reviewer knows about each other). Interaction between the author and reviewers occurs through the editor-in-chief of the journal.

5. The reviewer, within 14 days of receiving the article, provides the journal's editorial board with his/her conclusion on the article with final recommendations. He/she may indicate the need to make certain corrections to the article. In this case, the article is sent to the author with a proposal to take into account the comments when preparing an updated version of the article or to refute them with arguments. The author adds a letter to the revised article containing responses to all comments and explaining all changes that were made to the article. The corrected version is resubmitted to the reviewer for decision-making and preparation of a conclusion on the possibility of publication.

6. Reviewers are informed that the manuscripts sent by them are the intellectual property of the authors and relate to information that is not subject to disclosure. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the article submitted for review or use the materials of the article before its publication.

7. Reviewing is carried out on the basis of confidentiality, when information about the article (timelines for receipt, content, stages and features of the review, reviewers' comments and the final decision on publication) is not communicated to anyone except the authors and reviewers. Violation of this requirement is possible only if there are signs or statements about the unreliability or falsification of the materials of the article. In any case, the author of the reviewed work is given the opportunity to familiarize himself with the text of the review, in particular, if he disagrees with the conclusions of the reviewer.