Review Process



  1. 1.     Initial manuscript evaluation

After submission of a manuscript to the Editor in Chief, the Editor reads it and forms the first opinion whether the manuscript is worth going through the process for publication purposes. The Editor may advise on corrections to be made as he deems fit and sends the manuscript back to the author(s) for necessary action. Reasons for not accepting the manuscript at this stage include insufficient originality, serious legal flaws, poor grammar or language, or being outside the aims and scope of the journal. Authors of rejected manuscripts at this stage will usually be informed within two (2) weeks of receipt.

  1. 2.     Manuscript evaluation

Those manuscripts that meet the minimum criteria after initial manuscript evaluation are passed on by the Editor in Chief to a reviewer for evaluation. After evaluation of the manuscript, the reviewer advises the Editorial Board on whether the manuscript should be published as it is, be published after corrections indicated by the reviewer, or not be published at all.

  1. 3.     Re-submission of the manuscript

If the reviewer under the previous stage advised the Board that the manuscript should be published after corrections indicated by the reviewer, and after the author(s) has effected those corrections or improvements, the author(s) submit the manuscript to the Editor in Chief for further processing.

  1. 4.     Type of review

A “double blind” type of review is used when reviewing the submitted manuscripts. In this type, the reviewer remains anonymous to the author(s) throughout and following the reviewing process, whilst the identity of the author(s) likewise remains unknown to the reviewer.

  1. 5.     How the reviewer is selected

Whenever possible, the reviewers are matched to the manuscript according to their expertise in the particular area of law. The review team comprises all senior staff of the University of Dar es Salaam School of Law i.e. those with PhD degrees and Professors and other qualified staff from outside the UDSM School of Law. The School has 13 Professors who are PhD degree holders and 15 PhD degree holders who are not yet professors.

  1. 6.     Review reports

Reviewers are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript:

a)     Is original as to thought and method (including data)

b)     Is methodologically sound

c)     Has results which are clearly presented and support conclusions

d)     Correctly and exhaustively references previous relevant works

e)     Follows appropriate ethical guidelines, especially concerning plagiarism

f)      Clearly adds to the knowledge and development of the field

g)     Relevant in terms of substance

h)     Follows a proper format

Language correction is not part of the review process but the reviewers are encouraged to suggest corrections of language and style of the manuscript. In the final round, the handling editor will check matters of linguistic and stylistic corrections and may suggest or apply corrections at this point. In rare cases, the manuscripts may be returned to the author(s) for a full linguistic and stylistic revision.

  1. 7.     Duration of the review process

There is no specific time limit for doing the review process. The duration will always depend on a number of factors, for example the length of the submitted manuscript, the number of manuscripts that the reviewer is assigned to evaluate, and the complexity of the area of law under which the manuscript falls.