VESTNIK OF SAINT PETERSBURG UNIVERSITY. LAW


RELIMINARY CONSIDERATION AND REVIEW OF MANUSCRIPTS SUBMITTED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE JOURNAL

1. Manuscripts submitted for publication in journal “Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Law” (Journal hereafter) must be registered by executive secretary specifying date of manuscript receipt. The decision if manuscript will be published shall be made no later than 60 days since manuscript receipt.

2. All manuscripts received for publication in Journal are subject to preliminary assessment by executive editor of the Journal within 15 days. Executive editor determines whether manuscript conforms to formatting and author’s ethics requirements. In case of deviations author receives written notice on results of preliminary assessment.

3. After preliminary assessment manuscripts are forwarded for independent scientific review by (not less than two) acknowledged experts. Such experts shall have Russian PhD or higher doctorate degree or foreign equivalent and have recent publications (not older than 3 years) within the same subject as the manuscript. Second or additional scientific review can be set by the decision of the executive editor particularly in case of repeated submission of the modified and improved manuscript.

4. Scientific review can be done by any qualified specialists (primarily external), including members of Issue editorial board, providing that there is no any conflict of interest (direct subordination between author and reviewer, academic advising, co-authorship, etc.). Reviewer have to resign and inform the board if there is conflict of interest, author, in his turn, can identify undesirable reviewers.

5. Author does not receive any information about reviewer, if opposite is not agreed with the latter.

6. Based on the scientific review author gets his part of the review (with consolidated list of comments, improvement suggestions of scientific reviewers and recommendations to take them in account when editing the manuscript, and conditions of manuscript publication).

7. Scientific review of articles should give well-reasoned assessment of:
• overall scientific level of the manuscript;
• the name of the manuscript and if it reflects its content;
• scientific and informative novelty (freshness) of the manuscript;
• scientific validity;
• theoretical and practical relevance of the conclusions;
• manuscript structure, language and style, formatting;
• abidance to the scientific ethics;
• conformity to readers’ interest.
Assessment shall be finished with summarised suggestions and/or remarks for the author consideration.

8. Scientific review of other papers (Scientific and Practical Expert Opinion, Comments and Reviews, etc.) should give well-reasoned assessment of:
• overall scientific level of the manuscript;
• the name of the manuscript and if it reflects its content;
• informative novelty (freshness) of the manuscript;
• validity, theoretical and practical relevance of the conclusions;
• manuscript structure, language and style, formatting;
• abidance to the scientific ethics;
• conformity to readers’ interest.

9. As a result of scientific review reviewer gives one of the following recommendations:
• recommendation to publish manuscript as it is (without any suggestions or remarks);
• recommendation to publish manuscript and to present suggestions and remarks for author consideration (any changes of manuscript at the authors discretion);
• recommendation to publish manuscript only if reviewer comments are implemented;
• recommendation to refuse publication with the right to submit modified manuscript;
• recommendation to refuse publication without right to submit modified manuscript.
The manuscript can be modified maximum two times. If modified manuscript submitted later than 4 months since review, it is considered new.

10. Editorial board drafts sample form defining structure and the content of review. Review consists of two parts. The first part corresponds to article 7 and the second part corresponds to article 8 of this Regulation. First part has to be sent to the author and both parts have to be sent to the Journal editorial board.

11. Editorial board must provide confidentiality of any information about the manuscript that was sent for scientific review. Reviewer has to sign an agreement not to disclose any information about the manuscript and its content and about its author. Any discussions of the reviewed manuscript with third parties are not allowed. Reviewers cannot use or refer to the manuscript before its publication.

12. Manuscripts submitted to the Journal editorial board for publication must:
• have authors (unique) nature;
• be relevant and integral;
• include developed by author theoretical concepts, or resolution of the scientific issue, or new finds contributing to the legal science;
• have novel and justified solutions compare to other known solutions;
• provide information of practical use of the received scientific results or recommendations on practical use of the scientific conclusions.

13. Positive review does not guarantee manuscript publication. Final decision is made by editorial board at the meeting and recorded in the minutes.

14. Reviews are held at the editor’s office of the Journal for maximum of 5 years. Reviews of published but refused for publication manuscripts have to be submitted with relevant issue of the Issue. No editing and publishing operations can be done in case of the absence or partial submission of the reviews.

15. The editorial office is obliged to send copies of reviews in the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation in according to the corresponding request.