AJEE is an Open Access Journal which supports online submission and a double-anonymized peer review system. These are the requirements to be followed by the authors while submitting, reviewing, editing and other actions within the publishing process.
The best practice of international publishing community was used for these requirements: “Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing”
EASE Guidelines, Checklists and Tools
AJEE Editorial Workflow on Scholastica
At AJEE, we ensure a transparent, ethical, and accountable editorial process using the Scholastica platform. Our editorial workflow is designed to maintain academic rigor and integrity through clearly defined responsibilities and oversight at each stage.
Submission and Initial Screening
All manuscripts submitted to the Journal are initially screened by the Editor-in-Chief (EiC). Based on the subject area, the EiC assigns the manuscript to an appropriate Managing Editor and /or Section Editor.
For submissions involving AJEE staff members (including the EiC, Managing Editors, Section Editors, Advisory and/or Editorial Board members), the handling is reassigned to an external Section Editor or a designated Managing Editor not involved in the paper. In the case of submissions by the EiC, a separate procedure is followed: a Deputy Editor-in-Chief, together with two members of the Editorial Board, is appointed to manage and make the publication decision. The EiC does not participate in any editorial decisions regarding their own work.
All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial screening by the editorial office, which includes a check for originality using iThenticate plagiarism detection software. In addition, the journal reserves the right to screen parts of the manuscript using available AI detection tools (such as those provided by OpenAI) to ensure compliance with authorship integrity and transparency in the use of generative AI tools.
Peer Review Handling
The assigned editor (AE) is responsible for:
1. Verifying that the manuscript is fully anonymized for double-anonymised peer review,
2. Inviting appropriate peer reviewers based on subject matter expertise, absence of conflict of interest, and diversity of perspectives.
While authors and Section Editors may suggest potential peer reviewers during submission, the final decision on reviewer selection is made by the Assigned Editor (Managing or Section Editor), ensuring balance, fairness, and transparency.
Peer reviewers are selected with attention to expertise, objectivity, and independence. Their feedback forms the foundation for editorial decisions, but not obliges them. Please see details of peer review here https://ajee-journal.com/ajee-reviewer-guide
Editorial Decision-Making Process
After receiving the peer reviews, the Assigned Editor (AE):
- Carefully evaluates the reviewers’ feedback and the manuscript’s overall quality and compliance with journal standards,
- Prepares a detailed recommendation for the manuscript (acceptance, minor or major revision, or rejection), including justification based on both content and reviewer input,
- Forwards the manuscript, reviews, and editorial recommendation to the Decision-Making Editor. If one of the co-authors is the Editor-in-Chief, an AJEE editor, or a member of the Editorial Board, or Advisory Board, the decision must be made by a designated Deputy Editor together with two independent Editorial Board members to avoid any conflict of interest. In all other cases, the Assigned Editor may serve as the Decision-Making Editor and issue the final decision,
- Ensures that the final decision is made in alignment with the journal’s editorial policy and communicated clearly to the author through the Scholastica platform.
The Decision-Making Editor makes the final decision and communicates it to the author. In the case of Revise & Resubmit, the manuscript re-enters the review process, repeating the editorial steps as needed.
All editorial decisions are documented and recorded through Scholastica to ensure traceability and accountability.
Publication Transparency and Editorial Roles Disclosure
At Access to Justice in Eastern Europe (AJEE), we are committed to transparency and editorial integrity. Each published article includes a disclosure of the key individuals and tools involved in the editorial process. Specifically, we indicate:
The Assigned Managing Editor,
-
Language Editors,
-
The Section Editor (if applicable),
-
The Decision-Making Editor (if different from AE),
-
The language editing tools, and/or AI-assisted tools (e.g., ChatGPT, iThenticate) and/or any technical tools used during the editorial process, if applicable.
In addition, we publicly disclose the following publication details:
- Date of submission and acceptance of the article
- Online First publication (if applicable)
- Date of final publication
- Fast-track status
- Number of reviewer reports submitted in the first round
- Number of revision rounds
In cases where AJEE staff are involved as authors, an explicit note is added to confirm that the editorial process was handled independently by a designated, non-conflicted editor or editorial board team.
Reviewer Development and Participation
AJEE offers a professional development track for reviewers. Those who demonstrate consistency and commitment may be invited to join as Managing Editors or Editorial Board members. Reviewers are expected to uphold academic integrity, confidentiality, and new AJEE’s peer review policies.
Note
This updated version applies to all manuscripts submitted on or after 10 June 2025, as published on the journal’s official website.
AJEE Editorial and Peer Review Process, adopted on June 1, 2025
Contributors:
Iryna Izarova (Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing), Yuliia Hartman (Writing – review & editing), Bohdana Zahrebelna (Writing – review & editing)