The editorial process for the blog/article (1500-2000 words) shall follow a double-blind peer review system, with the Board of Editors being consulted for all articles whereas the Senior Editorial Board shall only be consulted particularly in cases involving longer, technical, or specialized submissions (6,000-8,000 words).
The proposed editorial structure is as follows:
Tier I – Student Editorial Board: Comprising student members of the Centre.
Tier II – Board of Editors: Consisting of Assistant Professors and legal professionals, including Senior Associates, Associates, Advocates, and similar practitioners.
Tier III – Senior Editorial Board: Comprising Professors, Senior Advocates, Partners of law firms, Principal Associates, and other senior professionals with expertise in relevant legal fields.
Review Workflow
At the first stage, the Student Editorial Board shall conduct similarity checks and AI-detection tests to assess whether the manuscript submitted by the author is an original piece of work. The Student Editorial Board will also identify and flag any preliminary issues relating to structure, clarity, formatting, or basic substantive concerns. The manuscript shall then be returned to the author for necessary corrections.
Upon receipt of the revised manuscript, the article shall be forwarded to members of the Board of Editors. The Board of Editors would be consulted only for confirmation whether the substantive content of the blog/article is suitable for publication. Once the Board of Editors provides a ‘No-Objection’ to the publication of the article, the manuscript shall be approved for publication on the Centre’s website. In cases involving longer or specialized submissions, the Senior Editorial Board may be consulted for additional guidance and review.
