The Indonesian Journal of Digital Crime and Criminal Justice is committed to maintaining high standards of academic quality, integrity, and scholarly rigor. All manuscripts submitted to the journal undergo a double-blind peer review process, whereby the identities of both authors and reviewers are concealed throughout the review process to ensure an objective, fair, and unbiased evaluation.

Initial Editorial Assessment

Upon submission, each manuscript is first evaluated by the Editorial Board to determine its suitability with the journal’s focus and scope, adherence to submission guidelines, originality, and overall academic quality. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s basic requirements may be rejected without external review.

Double-Blind Peer Review Process

Manuscripts that pass the initial editorial screening are assigned to at least three independent reviewers with expertise relevant to the subject matter of the manuscript. Reviewers assess submissions based on several criteria, including:

• Originality and contribution to knowledge;

• Relevance to the journal’s focus and scope;

• Theoretical and methodological rigor;

• Accuracy and validity of analysis;

• Clarity of argumentation and presentation;

• Quality and relevance of references;

• Ethical compliance and academic integrity.

Editorial Decisions

Based on reviewers’ recommendations, the Editor may make one of the following decisions:

1. Accept Submission – The manuscript is accepted without revisions.

2. Minor Revisions Required – The manuscript is accepted subject to minor revisions.

3. Major Revisions Required – Substantial revisions are required before further consideration.

4. Resubmit for Review – The manuscript requires significant improvements and may undergo an additional review process.

5. Reject Submission – The manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal.

The Editor-in-Chief retains the final authority regarding all publication decisions.

Revision and Resubmission

Authors are expected to revise their manuscripts in accordance with reviewers’ comments and submit a response explaining how the comments have been addressed. Revised manuscripts may be returned to the original reviewers for further evaluation when necessary.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts and review materials are treated as confidential documents. Editors and reviewers must not disclose, discuss, or use unpublished materials for personal advantage or any purpose unrelated to the review process.

Ethical Standards

Reviewers are expected to conduct reviews objectively, constructively, and professionally. Any potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed to the Editorial Office. The journal adheres to internationally recognized standards of publication ethics and takes all reasonable measures to prevent plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, and other forms of academic misconduct.

Review Timeline