For the evaluation of each article, two independent reviewers are appointed from outside the institution to which the author of the article is affiliated.
The review process is anonymous. Both the reviewer and the author of the reviewed text do not know each other's identities (the double blind review process).
Reviewers are appointed by the Editor-in-Chief in consultation with the Secretary of the Editorial Board.
No personal relationships or professional subordination relationships can occur between the author of the text and the reviewer.
If there can be a probability of scientific cooperation between the author and the reviewer during the three years preceding the year of preparation of the review, the reviewer will be asked to submit a written declaration of absence of a conflict of interest.
The review must be in writing and must contain an unambiguous conclusion whether the article should or should not be accepted for publication.
If in doubt, the final decision to publish the article is made by the Editorial Board on the basis of both reviews.
The editors send the author the text of the review, without disclosing the reviewer’s identity. The names of reviewers of particular publications or issues of journals are not revealed.
The list of co-operating reviewers will be published on a yearly basis on the website of the Constitutional Review.
