Peer Review Process

All manuscripts submitted to JTIL must comply with the journal’s focus and scope, author guidelines, article template, publication ethics, and citation requirements. Each submission is initially evaluated for scholarly relevance, originality, methodological quality, clarity of argument, and contribution to Islamic legal studies. Manuscripts that fall outside the journal’s scope or fail to meet essential academic and technical standards may be returned to the authors or declined before external review.

Every manuscript must be original and free from plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate citation, and unauthorized reuse of previously published material. The editorial team conducts similarity screening using appropriate plagiarism-detection software. Authors are also strongly encouraged to perform their own similarity check before submission and to ensure that all quotations, ideas, data, and sources are properly acknowledged.

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are evaluated through a double-anonymous peer-review process, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are concealed from one another. Each research article is reviewed by at least two suitably qualified experts with relevant disciplinary or methodological expertise. Reviewers assess the manuscript’s originality, theoretical foundation, research method, analysis, use of sources, academic contribution, and suitability for publication in JTIL.

Reviewers provide constructive, evidence-based, and confidential comments intended to strengthen the manuscript. Their recommendations may include:

The final decision on acceptance, revision, or rejection is made by the assigned editor or Editor-in-Chief after considering the reviewers’ reports, the authors’ responses, the quality of the revised manuscript, and the journal’s editorial standards. The order and scheduling of accepted articles are determined by the editorial team based on the date of final acceptance, thematic coherence, issue planning, and the journal’s commitment to balanced scholarly representation. Editorial decisions remain independent and are not determined solely by reviewer recommendations.