Peer Review Policy

Peer Review Policy

Last Updated: 5 March 2026

This Peer Review Policy describes the editorial evaluation and peer review procedures applied to manuscripts submitted to Inkbound Publishers (“Inkbound”, “we”, “us”, or “our”), accessible at https://inkbound.org (the “Website”).

Inkbound Publishers was previously known as The Law Brigade (Book) Publisher, and the current publishing platform continues the academic publishing activities formerly carried out under that name. References to “Inkbound”, “we”, “us”, or “our” in this policy refer to the publisher operating the Website and its associated publishing services.

Inkbound is committed to maintaining rigorous scholarly standards through transparent, fair, and impartial peer review processes. The peer review system is designed to ensure that all published works meet recognized academic standards of originality, methodological soundness, and scholarly contribution.

1. Purpose of Peer Review

Peer review is a critical component of academic publishing and serves to:

  • evaluate the scholarly quality, originality, and relevance of submitted manuscripts;

  • ensure the accuracy and integrity of research findings;

  • provide constructive feedback to authors for improving their work;

  • assist editors in making informed publication decisions.

Inkbound applies peer review procedures in accordance with widely accepted scholarly publishing standards and ethical principles recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics.

2. Double-Blind Peer Review Model

Inkbound primarily employs a double-blind peer review model.

Under this model:

  • the identity of the authors is not disclosed to reviewers, and

  • the identity of reviewers is not disclosed to the authors.

This approach is designed to ensure impartial evaluation and to minimize potential bias during the review process.

Authors are therefore expected to submit manuscripts that are appropriately anonymized where required for peer review.

3. Peer Review of Monographs

All scholarly monographs submitted to Inkbound undergo editorial evaluation followed by double-blind peer review.

The review process may involve one or more independent experts in the relevant academic field who assess the manuscript based on criteria including:

  • originality and scholarly contribution;

  • methodological rigor and academic quality;

  • clarity of argument and structure;

  • relevance to the intended academic audience.

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the editorial office may:

  • accept the manuscript for publication;

  • request revisions (minor or major);

  • request further review; or

  • decline the manuscript.

4. Peer Review of Edited Volumes and Book Chapters

For edited volumes, the review process typically includes evaluation at two levels:

  1. Proposal and Volume-Level Evaluation
    The overall concept, structure, and scholarly value of the edited volume are evaluated by the editorial team and may undergo external peer review.

  2. Chapter-Level Review
    Individual chapters included in the edited volume are subject to double-blind peer review to ensure academic quality and relevance.

Editors of the volume may assist in coordinating the review process; however, the final editorial decisions remain with Inkbound.

5. Peer Review of Conference Proceedings

Conference proceedings submitted for publication with Inkbound are generally expected to have undergone peer review organized by the conference editorial committee.

However, Inkbound reserves the right to independently evaluate the quality and rigor of the conference review process.

Where the editorial board determines that:

  • the conference-level peer review process does not meet the publisher’s academic standards; or

  • additional scholarly validation is necessary,

Inkbound may conduct additional double-blind peer review of selected or all conference papers prior to publication.

This step ensures that all published proceedings meet the scholarly standards expected of Inkbound publications.

6. Role and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Reviewers play a critical role in maintaining the quality of scholarly publications.

Reviewers are expected to:

  • evaluate manuscripts objectively and provide constructive feedback;

  • maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript and review process;

  • disclose any conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality;

  • complete reviews within the requested timeframe where possible.

Reviewers must not use unpublished information obtained during the review process for personal research or advantage.

7. Editorial Decision-Making

Final publication decisions are made by the editorial team based on:

  • reviewer reports and recommendations;

  • the manuscript’s scholarly merit and relevance;

  • the author’s response to reviewer comments.

Editorial decisions may include:

  • acceptance without revision;

  • minor revisions;

  • major revisions requiring further review;

  • rejection.

The editorial team retains full discretion in making final decisions regarding publication.

8. Confidentiality

All manuscripts submitted to Inkbound are treated as confidential documents.

Manuscripts and associated materials may not be shared with third parties without authorization from the editorial office, except where necessary for the peer review process.

Reviewers must not disclose or discuss the manuscript with others without permission from the editors.

9. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers and editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest, including:

  • personal or professional relationships with the authors;

  • financial or institutional affiliations that could influence the review process.

Where conflicts are identified, reviewers may be replaced to ensure impartial evaluation.

10. Ethical Oversight

Inkbound maintains oversight of the peer review process to ensure compliance with ethical standards.

Any suspected misconduct—including plagiarism, data fabrication, or manipulation of the review process—will be investigated in accordance with the publisher’s ethical policies and best practices recommended by the Committee on Publication Ethics.

11. Appeals and Complaints

Authors who believe that an editorial decision was based on a misunderstanding or procedural issue may submit a reasoned appeal to the editorial office.

Appeals will be reviewed by the editorial team and may involve consultation with additional reviewers or editors where appropriate.

Inkbound is committed to handling appeals in a fair, transparent, and timely manner.

Contact

For questions regarding the peer review process, please contact:

Email: editor@inkbound.org