Peer Review Process

1. Peer Review Type

Sharia, Yurisprudence, and Research in Islamic Knowledge (SYARAK) applies a double-blind peer review system, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout the review process. This ensures an unbiased, fair, and objective evaluation of all submitted manuscripts.

2. Editorial and Review Process

Initial Screening (Desk Evaluation)

Upon submission, manuscripts are assessed by the Editorial Office to ensure:

  • Alignment with the journal’s scope in Sharia, Islamic jurisprudence, Islamic legal studies, Islamic thought, Islamic knowledge, and related disciplines
  • Compliance with the author guidelines
  • Adequate academic quality, structure, and presentation
  • Compliance with applicable research and publication ethics

Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s basic standards or fall outside the journal’s scope may be rejected without external review.

Plagiarism Check

All manuscripts are screened using plagiarism detection tools to ensure originality and prevent academic misconduct.

Peer Review Process

Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the topic, such as Sharia, Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), uṣūl al-fiqh, maqāṣid al-sharīʿah, Islamic legal thought, Qur'anic studies, Hadith studies, Islamic theology, Islamic education, Islamic ethics, Islamic family law, Islamic legal studies, Islamic civilization, and related fields.

Reviewers are selected based on their academic qualifications, research expertise, and relevant publication experience. The review process follows recognized standards and best practices in scholarly publishing.

Editorial Decision

Based on reviewers’ reports, the Editor will make one of the following decisions:

  • Accept
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Reject

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers are asked to evaluate manuscripts based on the following aspects:

  • Relevance to Sharia, Islamic jurisprudence, Islamic knowledge, and related disciplines
  • Originality and contribution to Islamic scholarship
  • Clarity of research objectives and research questions
  • Appropriateness and rigor of the research methodology
  • Quality of data, textual analysis, legal analysis, or other forms of scholarly analysis
  • Accuracy and relevance of Islamic sources and references
  • Theoretical and practical contribution
  • Quality of writing and manuscript organization
  • Appropriate use of Islamic legal principles, theories, methodologies, or perspectives where relevant
  • Compliance with research and publication ethical standards

4. Review Timeline

Sharia, Yurisprudence, and Research in Islamic Knowledge (SYARAK) is committed to maintaining an efficient and timely peer review process:

  • Average review time: 1–3 weeks
  • First decision: approximately 2–4 weeks after submission

The review period may vary depending on reviewer availability, manuscript complexity, and the number of revisions required.

5. Ethical Standards and Transparency

This journal adheres to internationally recognized ethical standards and follows the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Maintain strict confidentiality regarding the submitted manuscript
  • Declare any potential conflicts of interest
  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback
  • Avoid using unpublished information from submitted manuscripts for personal or professional advantage
  • Evaluate manuscripts objectively without discrimination based on the authors’ identity, institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, or other personal characteristics

6. Author Revisions

Authors must:

  • Address all reviewer comments carefully and systematically
  • Submit a detailed response to reviewers explaining how each comment has been addressed
  • Revise the manuscript within the specified timeframe
  • Ensure that revisions maintain the accuracy, originality, and academic integrity of the manuscript

Failure to adequately address reviewer comments or comply with revision requirements may result in rejection of the manuscript.

7. Final Decision

The final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief, based on:

  • Reviewer recommendations
  • Quality and completeness of revisions
  • Academic quality and originality
  • Methodological rigor
  • Overall scholarly merit and relevance to the journal’s scope

The Editor-in-Chief may request additional review or consultation when necessary before making the final decision.

8. Production and Publication

Accepted manuscripts will undergo:

  • Professional copyediting and proofreading
  • Layout and formatting
  • Final author proofreading prior to publication

All articles are published under an open access model, ensuring free and immediate access to readers worldwide.

9. Appeals and Complaints

Authors have the right to appeal editorial decisions by submitting a formal request with clear justification and supporting information. Appeals will be reviewed objectively by the Editor-in-Chief or the Editorial Board.

An appeal should address specific concerns regarding the editorial or review process rather than simply disagreeing with the decision. The journal may seek additional independent assessment when considered necessary.

10. General Provisions

The journal may assign additional reviewers when necessary, particularly when a manuscript covers interdisciplinary topics or requires specialized expertise. The review period may be adjusted depending on reviewer availability and manuscript complexity.

A rapid review process may be considered for manuscripts addressing time-sensitive or emerging issues in Sharia, Islamic jurisprudence, Islamic legal studies, and related fields, subject to editorial capacity and reviewer availability.

Editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts at any stage of the editorial and publication process if serious ethical concerns, plagiarism, research misconduct, conflicts of interest, or other violations of publication standards are identified.