Peer Review Policy

The Griffith Journal of Law & Human Dignity is a double-blind refereed scholarly law journal. All submitted manuscripts are subject to desk review by the Editorial Board. To save time for authors and peer-reviewers, only those papers that seem most likely to meet our editorial criteria are sent for peer review. In finding suitable referees, Editors have regard for the argument presented in the manuscript and the likely response of a potential referee to that argument based on the information publicly available about that referee. The Editorial Board reserves the right to select referees to address any shortcomings in the manuscript to help the author improve the quality of their manuscript.

The Journal requires two referees to review each manuscript. At least one referee is required to have an LLB. A third referee may be required for narrative submissions, where the author is a former Editor or where the manuscript is hostile to a particular body or institution. The Editorial Board, at its discretion may engage a third reviewer where required.

The referees can make the following recommendations:

  • Publish.
  • Publish subject to minor edits of grammar and style.
  • Publish subject to revision (provide details in comments or on manuscript).
  • Reconsider for publication if the author rewrites taking comments into account.
  • Do not publish.

The Editorial Board will give appropriate weight to the feedback from each referee in deciding whether or not to proceed to the editing stage.