The Lex Octa Chronicle – Ensuring Quality through Rigorous Review
At The Lex Octa Chronicle, we believe that the peer review process is the cornerstone of academic publishing, ensuring that every article we publish upholds the highest standards of legal research, clarity, originality, and academic integrity.
Purpose of Peer Review
Our peer review system is designed to:
Evaluate the authenticity and originality of submitted content.
Ensure scholarly accuracy and relevance to the field of law.
Provide constructive feedback to authors for improvement and refinement.
Uphold ethical standards in legal writing and publishing.
Type of Peer Review
We follow a Double-Blind Peer Review process:
The reviewer does not know the identity of the author.
The author does not know the identity of the reviewer.
This helps maintain neutrality, eliminate bias, and ensure objective evaluation.
Review Process
Initial Screening
The editorial team first checks the submission for basic compliance, formatting, plagiarism (via tools), and theme relevance.
Non-compliant papers may be rejected at this stage.
Assignment to Reviewers
Each submission is assigned to two subject-matter experts in law.
Reviewers are selected based on expertise and non-conflict of interest.
Review Criteria
Reviewers evaluate the paper based on:Relevance to contemporary legal issues
Originality and innovation
Depth of legal analysis
Structure, clarity, and language
Proper citations and referencing
Contribution to legal scholarship
Review Outcomes
Accepted as is
Accepted with minor revisions
Major revisions required
Rejected
Feedback to Author
Constructive comments are sent to the author for revision (if any).
The author must resubmit within the given timeline (usually 7–10 days).
Final Decision
The editorial board makes the final decision based on reviewer recommendations.
Authors are notified within 15 to 20 days of submission.
Review Timeline
Initial Acknowledgment: Within 2 days
Review Timeframe: 7–14 days
Final Decision: Within 20 days
(We strive to ensure fast yet meaningful review without compromising quality.)
Confidentiality & Ethics
All manuscripts are treated with strict confidentiality.
Reviewers are expected to disclose any conflict of interest.
Reviewers are advised not to copy, share, or use any unpublished data for their benefit.
Reviewer Guidelines
Be constructive, respectful, and detailed in feedback.
Suggest improvements with clear reasoning.
Refrain from personal comments or judgments.
If you’re interested in joining our Reviewer Panel, please contact us at journal@lexocta.com with your CV and area of expertise.
Continuous Improvement
We are committed to refining our peer review process over time based on feedback, emerging ethical standards, and best practices in academic publishing.