Journal Policies

Nyayadeep Shiksha Law Journal is committed to promoting integrity, originality, and fairness in academic publishing. While the Journal is not a formal member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), it endeavours to adhere to COPE’s Core Practices in spirit and follow internationally accepted norms of publication ethics.

Authors’ Responsibilities

  1. Submit only original, unpublished work not under review elsewhere.

  2. Ensure that proper credit is given through accurate referencing and acknowledgment of all sources.

  3. Avoid plagiarism, self-plagiarism, data fabrication, or manipulation.

  4. Disclose conflicts of interest and sources of funding, if any.

  5. Provide necessary permissions for reproducing copyrighted material.

Editors’ Responsibilities

  1. Maintain editorial independence and fairness, free of bias based on race, gender, religion, or institutional affiliation.

  2. Remove all personal or identifying information from manuscripts before review.

  3. Select competent reviewers with relevant subject expertise.

  4. Ensure confidentiality of all manuscripts during the review process.

  5. Take corrective measures (erratum, retraction, expression of concern) in cases of ethical breaches post-publication.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

  1. Treat manuscripts as strictly confidential.
  2. Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback.
  3. Declare conflicts of interest and decline reviews where applicable.
  4. Avoid attempting to identify the authors.
  5. Refrain from using unpublished data or insights for personal advantage.

The Journal follows a Double-Blind Peer Review Process to ensure impartiality and academic rigor.

Review Workflow

  1. Preliminary Screening: All submissions are first reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief for plagiarism, formatting, and scope compliance.
  2. Anonymization: The Editor-in-Chief removes all personal or identifying details before forwarding manuscripts for peer review.
  3. Assignment of Reviewers: Each manuscript is sent to two independent reviewers (Editorial Board members or Guest Reviewers), who remain anonymous to the authors and to each other.
  4. Scoring System: Each reviewer assigns an overall score out of 5 after evaluating the manuscript on specific parameters (see below). Manuscript scoring less than 6 will be rejected.
  5. Decision Criteria:
    • 7–10 points: Accepted for publication (with minor revisions if required).
    • 6 points: May be considered for publication after major revisions.
  6. Revisions: Authors must respond to reviewer comments in detail and resubmit within the specified timeline.
  7. Final Decision: The Editorial Board, guided by reviewer feedback and author revisions, makes the final publication decision.

Although the final score is given out of 5, reviewers are required to provide narrative comments under each of the following parameters:

  1. Originality & Contribution – Novelty of research, relevance to legal scholarship.
  2. Clarity of Argument – Precision in framing issues, legal reasoning, and objectives.
  3. Depth of Legal Analysis – Engagement with statutes, case law, and secondary literature.
  4. Methodology & Use of Authorities – Appropriateness of research method, accuracy of citations.
  5. Structure & Presentation – Coherence, language, formatting, and readability

Nyayadeep Shiksha Law Journal is an Open Access Journal. All articles are available free of charge to readers worldwide without subscription or registration barriers.

  1. Users are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, and link to the full texts of the articles, provided proper citation is given.
  2. Authors retain the copyright of their work while granting the Journal a license to publish and disseminate under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-commercial (CC BY-NC) license, unless otherwise specified.

Withdrawal of manuscripts is strongly discouraged. However, it may be permitted under the following conditions:

  1. Before Review Assignment: Authors may request withdrawal within 7 days of submission by emailing the Editor-in-Chief.
  2. After Review Assignment: Withdrawal requests will only be entertained if the author provides a valid and documented reason (e.g., ethical concerns, critical error in data).
  3. After Acceptance: Withdrawal is generally not allowed. Exceptions may be made only in cases of ethical violations, plagiarism, or duplicate submission.
  4. Retractions: If an article is found to violate ethical standards after publication, the Journal reserves the right to retract it and issue a public retraction notice.
  5. Editorial Discretion: The final decision regarding withdrawal or retraction rests solely with the Editorial Board.