The Rest: Journal of Politics and Development applies a double-blind peer-review process to all submissions.
All manuscripts submitted to the journal are evaluated in accordance with international academic publishing standards and publication ethics principles.
1. Initial Editorial Screening
All submissions are initially evaluated by the editorial team.
At this stage, manuscripts are assessed in terms of:
- relevance to the journal’s scope,
- academic quality,
- originality,
- methodological rigour,
- language quality,
- formatting requirements,
- and compliance with publication ethics standards.
The editorial team may request technical corrections before proceeding to the peer review stage.
2. Plagiarism and Similarity Check
All submissions are screened using plagiarism detection software such as iThenticate and/or Turnitin before peer review.
Similarity reports are evaluated qualitatively by the editorial team. The journal does not rely solely on numerical similarity percentages.
Manuscripts containing plagiarism, self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, fabricated data, falsified information, or unethical academic conduct may be rejected at any stage of the evaluation process.
3. Desk Rejection
The editorial team may reject a manuscript before peer review if:
- the manuscript falls outside the scope of the journal,
- lacks sufficient academic quality,
- contains major methodological weaknesses,
- demonstrates inadequate language quality,
- violates publication ethics,
- or fails to comply with the journal’s submission guidelines.
Desk rejection decisions are made by the editorial team.
4. Double-Blind Peer Review
Manuscripts that successfully pass the initial editorial evaluation are sent to at least two independent reviewers under a double-blind peer review system.
Under this system:
- reviewers do not know the identity of the authors,
- authors do not know the identity of the reviewers.
Reviewers are selected according to their academic expertise and research background.
5. Reviewer Reports and Revision Process
Based on reviewer evaluations, the editorial team may decide:
- to accept the manuscript,
- to request minor revisions,
- to request major revisions,
- or to reject the manuscript.
Authors are expected to submit revised versions together with a response letter explaining how reviewer comments were addressed.
Revised manuscripts may be sent to reviewers for re-evaluation where necessary.
6. Final Decision
The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on reviewer reports, editorial evaluations, and the journal’s publication policies.
The editorial team reserves the right to make minor editorial corrections to accepted manuscripts.
7. Appeals and Complaints
Authors may submit reasoned objections regarding editorial decisions by contacting the editorial office.
All appeals and complaints are evaluated confidentially and in accordance with publication ethics principles.
8. Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions are made independently by the editorial team.
Institutional affiliations, political considerations, financial interests, sponsors, or external organisations do not influence the evaluation or publication process.