JLGRS uses double-anonymised peer review: author identities are withheld from reviewers, and reviewer identities are withheld from authors. Editors and authorised administrative staff have access to identities where needed to manage the submission.
Research articles, review articles, and substantive case or legislative analyses normally require reports from at least two independent reviewers with relevant expertise. Editors first assess scope, originality, presentation, research integrity and suitability for review. A manuscript may be declined at this stage with an explanation.
Authors submit an identified title page separately from an anonymised manuscript. Reviewers are asked not to seek author identities. Complete anonymity cannot be guaranteed where a topic, public preprint or self-citation makes authorship recognisable.
Reviewers evaluate the argument, evidence, methods, use of legal authorities, engagement with scholarship and contribution. They must disclose competing interests and keep material confidential. Authors may suggest reviewers, but the editor independently chooses and verifies appointments.
The handling editor assesses the reports and responses and may request further review. Decisions may be accept, minor revision, major revision or reject. Peer review does not guarantee acceptance or a fixed publication date.
Editorials, book reviews, notices and short correspondence may receive editorial review; the article type and any departure from external peer review must be clearly identified. Historical digitisation is not a new peer-review event.
Discovery resources for scholarly literature. Availability and coverage vary by platform.
About Discoverability →Authors retain copyright. New articles are published under CC BY 4.0.
Copyright & LicensingArchiving & PreservationPublished by Acadentium Research · Lahore, Pakistan
Annual publication: 15 June
editor@jlgrs.com
Authors retain copyright. New articles are published under CC BY 4.0. Historical articles follow their individual rights statements.
