Centre for Advanced Legal Studies and Research, (CALSAR), Thiruvananthapuram

Guidelines

The Academy Law Review considers and examines meticulously all submissions received. A lengthy selection process with several steps is adopted by us. Each submission is reviewed anonymously/blindly by at least 2 members of the Expert Peer Review Panel at the initial stage for initial acceptance or rejection. Thereafter, every submission go through more stages of review through the Editorial Board and Panel of Editors, while in conditional initial acceptance one more stage of review by the Expert Peer Review Panel as provided hereunder: (i)      Initial Peer Review and initial acceptance:
  • Immediately on receipt of the submission of the article by the author, it is forwarded to at least two members of the Expert Peer Review Panel. The two members will review the submission and assess whether the article has the requisite quality and standard for publication within 4 weeks, and the author is communicated of the initial acceptance. Thereafter it will be forwarded to two members of the Panel of Editors, who will meticulously review the article and also verify whether the article confirms to the guidelines and requirements for submission within 3 weeks. Then the matter is again placed along with the opinion of the editors before the same two members of the Expert Peer Review Panel. Next along with the opinion/ recommendation of the experts and editor, it is placed before the Editorial Board within 2 weeks from the date of review by the Editing team/Editorial Board. If both the members of the Expert Peer Review unanimously opine that the article satisfies/confirms to the guidelines, requirements for submission, the requisite quality and standard for publication and ethics policy of the Review, acceptance of the article would be communicated to the author within 6 weeks of initial acceptance along with the minor changes/modifications/ additions suggested by the Peer Review and Editorial Board. After such changes/ modifications/additions, it is placed before the Editorial Board, who may, on full satisfaction of the same, give final acceptance to the submission for publication.
 
  • If either of the members of the Expert Peer Review opine that the article doesn’t fully satisfy/confirm to the guidelines, requirements for submission, the requisite quality and standard for publication and ethics policy of the Review, but is of the opinion that the article has potential for publication with major editing, the article could be given conditional initial acceptance at the discretion of the Editorial Board subject to further editing or resubmission by the author based on the suggestions by the editors and the same could be communicated to the author.
  (ii)     Initial Conditional Acceptance:
  • The article could be initially accepted with conditions at the discretion of the Editorial Board in the event of either member Expert Peer Review opine that the article doesn’t fully satisfy/confirm to the guidelines, requirements for submission, the requisite quality and standard for publication and ethics policy of the Review, but is of the opinion that the article has potential for publication with major editing. The initial conditional acceptance shall be communicated within 4 weeks of receipt of submissions.
 
  • If the Peer Review finds potential for publication for the article submitted and suggests that some areas of study require more research or are left out or are not extensively or intensively covered or needs critical examination or evaluation or more original thinking, the article may be returned to the author by the Editorial Board, within 4 weeks of the initial conditional acceptance, with the opinion and suggestion of the Expert Peer Review team and Editorial Board for necessary changes/ modifications/additions and resubmission by the author to the Law Review.
  (c)     If the Peer Review finds potential for publication for the article submitted, provided the existing article is substantially edited or modified by the Panel of Editors and Editorial Board, at the discretion of the Editorial Board, initial conditional acceptance of the article is communicated to the author within 4 weeks of submission and his consent for editing is sought. If such consent is not refused within 2 weeks thereof, the article is reviewed and substantially edited by appropriate changes, modifications and additions by two members of the Panel of Editors and submitted for further review by two other members of the Editorial Board which would be completed within a period of 8 weeks. Thereafter, the edited version is communicated to the author. If the consent of the author for publication of the edited version is not refused within 2 weeks, the same is again placed before the same members of the Expert Peer Review Panel who may finally accept or refuse the edited version within 4 weeks of submission. If the Expert Peer Review Panel members finally accept the submission, it is placed before the Editorial Board, who, on full satisfaction on the same, may give final acceptance to the submission for publication.   (d)    In cases of divided opinion in the Board of Editors, the Board may decide to subject the article to further review including further Peer Review by two other members of the Expert Panel and review by two other members of the Panel of Editors. All decisions of the Editorial Board will be taken by majority vote.   (e)     Although we make every endeavor to expedite the process of review, please understand that our selection process involves several steps for careful and meticulous scrutiny and evaluation of the submission for maintaining high quality and standards of the research and study for publication and therefore it takes time as prescribed.   (f)     No best time or particular time is prescribed for submission of the article for publication of the Law Review. Any article, which is initially accepted with or without condition by the Law Review, is never rejected for lack of space; rather, but we will hold it over for publication by the next volume. It is advised that authors may submit their submissions as soon as they are ready as there is no last date for submission and the review process is elaborate and time consuming.   (g)    If the same person is a member of the Expert Peer Review Panel, Panel of Editors and Editorial Board, such person will not review the article in more than one capacity.   Blind and Anonymous Review
  • The Academy Law Review applies the same guidelines and standards of review to all submissions, and judges all submissions purely based on the merit of their content, without regard to the name of the author. We adopt a review process which is fully blind until the Editorial Board’s final vote. The review by the experts of the Peer Review Panel and members of the Panel of Experts and Editorial Board, till the final acceptance of the Editorial Board, shall be made without knowledge of the author’s identity, status, institution, or any other information. The identity of the author will be known only to the Chief Editor and all communications between the Law Review and the author shall be made only by and to the Chief Editor.
  (b)    We strictly and scrupulously adhere to the policy of anonymous review. For this purpose, the author is strictly required to provide his name, position, qualification, institution, affiliation, biographical information, acknowledgments or any other detail or information, which may reveal his identity, to a separate cover page. The title of the article alone is required to be included on the first text page without any identification of the author.   Double Blind Review: Double blind evaluation and strict anonymity are adopted by us in the review process. No consideration is given to the author’s name, prestige, position, status, reputation, institution, affiliation, prior publications, or pending publication offers for selection of the article for publication in the Law Review. So the articles are reviewed anonymously at both ends (both at the end of the author and reviewers). Consequently, the identity of the author will not be made known to the reviewers and the identity of the reviewers will not be made known to the author. Therefore, the author is strictly required to remove all identifying information from the article, headers, text, footnotes and the file name, while ensuring that the title of the article appears on the first page of the text. Confidentiality: The authors are intimated of all our decisions and communications by email and no communications are made other than through email. The reasons for rejection of any article for publication may not be discussed in our communications. The rejection of any article will be kept confidential, not be published and not made known to third persons.

The Academy Law Review publishes Main Articles, Essays, Case Critiques and Book Reviews to cater to different legal scholarship, needs and requirements.  The main articles and essays are two forms of legal scholarship and research which not only separates the longer ones from the shorter ones but also differentiated in the depth of research and nature of approach to legal analysis, scholarly communication and critique. The following are provided as guidelines for the authors for ensuring the quality and standard of the publication:

(1)       Main articles: The main article would help the reader to distinguish the longer and exhaustive study and research from shorter ones. So it should have an exhaustive, intensive and indepth research, study and analysis of the given subject. Besides complying with our Ethics Policy, it requires to be systematically organized and arranged. Doctrinal as well as empirical researches are encouraged. The authors are recommended optionally to pursue historical, scientific and multi disciplinary approaches to the subject matter.  The author is expected to logistically cover the subject matter, reflect his original thinking, present his critical analysis and evaluation and deliver his proposals, submissions, suggestions and conclusions. Rational and logical application of ideas, principles and interpretations are advised in relation to society and desirable social change. Research and study leading to suggestions for law reform through analysis of law and social change, concepts of justice, mores of the day, and practical realities in the present day society, are highly encouraged by the Academy Law Review. Preference may be given to subjects and topics of contemporary and recent significance of currently or controversially debated subjects or events.

(2)       Essays: Essays are intended to give the reader a shorter form of scholarship giving a comprehensive and critical analysis of a subject matter of general or specific scholarly interest or of recent/current subjects of debate. Specific events of current importance or controversy or debate may also form the subject of essay. Though shorter in form, besides complying with our Ethics Policy, it needs to be exhaustive, in-depth, exploratory and systematic. The author could start a new exciting or attractive scholarly conversation, present a new thought or idea for future discussion and law reform, critically review a development from the angle of law, social change and justice or start or engage in critical and analytical discussion or argument.

(3)       Case Critiques: The case critiques are intended to provide the reader with an exhaustive and critical legal scholarship of judicial pronouncement/decision of the apex or higher courts or other judicial forums. The author has to give a comprehensive and critical study and analysis of judicial decisions. Besides complying with our Ethics Policy, it needs to critically analyze impact of the decision on society, law and policy, social change and considerations of justice. The author is expected to identify and examine the line of judicial decisions in the area and trace the evolution of that branch of law and critically analyze the implications for its future development.

(4)       Book Reviews: We welcome scholars and practitioners to submit reviews of books which are forthcoming or those which have been published within the past twenty four months. The author reviewing the book, besides complying with our Ethics Policy, is expected to make a critical analysis and study of the book and highlight the finer points and point out suggestions and areas for improvement, if required. The author is also encouraged to examine similar contemporary or old literature related to the book under review.

Legal research and scholarship has developed more intensively in relation to its impact on society and law reform touching all spears of life including right jurisprudence, commerce, industry and competition. So on ethical and fair considerations, certain standards to be adopted by the author as conditions for accepting the article are laid down by the Law Review as follows:

(i)        Originality: Articles must be the original work of the author or authors identified on the submission, except for material in the public domain or material from other works that are properly cited or included with the permission of the rights owners. Secondary sources shall not be cited as Primary Sources. The article, in whole or in part, must not have been published before.

(ii)       No Plagiarism: Source of all principles and facts are to be acknowledged and no principle or data or facts obtained from another source are to be used as the author’s own source without acknowledgement. No part of another article or work shall not be copied or borrowed without acknowledging it.

(iii)      Replicability: The documentation of datasets in scientific or empirical study by the author must be exhaustive and comprehensive and must be disclosed and made available by publication so that third parties may replicate the published findings. The datasets will be published in our website except where issues of confidentiality or privacy are involved.

(iv)      Citation: The author has to follow the style and citation prescribed and the citation format in Bluebook: A Uniform System of Citation (20th edition 2015) shall be followed and not tampered with. Lifting or copying or malpractice of footnote works of other authors or from other works/articles is unethical and disqualifies the submission.

(v)       Peer Review: Blind Peer Review increases the quality and standard of the article, assures originality and ensures independence and objectivity in the selection of articles for publication. We have adopted Guidelines for Peer Review for initial and final selection of the articles within a prescribed time frame. The author is strictly prohibited from enquiring or attempting to identify or identifying or contacting the persons who peer review or edit his article for maintaining objectivity and independence in selection and any act of the author violating this confidentiality is unethical and disqualifies the submission.

(vi)      Conflicts of Interest: Once a submission is accepted by the Journal, the author/authors must disclose all actual and potential conflicts of interest. Authors should disclose any personal, family or financial interests that may be affected by the results or conclusions in the submission. Disclosure of financial interest would include any source of outside funding for the research/submission and name of organizations that provided funding for the research/submission that may have affected or biased the assumptions, results, or conclusions in the article. For instance, if any payment or funding has been received from any organization for completing the research and article including expenses funded for the research study, travel, data compilation etc., the said association only needs to be noted and the organization thanked in the footnote. Authors should disclose their involvement or participation in any judicial decision or litigation that is mentioned in or which is relevant to the article. The conflict of interest or connection shall be disclosed in the first footnote of the published version of the article.

The Academy Law Review is published annually on a regular basis. The annual issue is published every year on or before 25th of August of that year with 250 to 400 Law Review pages. If there are more articles of high quality which cannot be comprised in one annual issue for the year, a second issue for the same year may be published that year on or before 15th of December of that year.

The Academy Law Review is published annually since 1977 without interruption or break.