• Erciyes University Law Faculty Journal adopts the Double-Blind Peer Review principle. In this system, the evaluation process is carried out without the author and reviewers knowing each other's identities, either directly or indirectly.
• The article submission and evaluation process is conducted transparently via the DergiPark system. All communication and file sharing between the author and reviewers are handled through this system.
• Reviewers should only accept the review of articles for which they have the necessary expertise to make an appropriate evaluation, can comply with the blind peer review principle, and can keep the details of the article confidential in every respect.

1. Review Invitation and System Login

• Log in to the DergiPark panel with your username and password.
• Select Erciyes University Law Faculty Journal from the journals listed in your panel.
• Access the article assigned to you by clicking on the "New Invitation" tab in the reviewer panel.

2. Article Evaluation Process

• Access the article information by clicking the "Show" button to the right of the relevant article.
• Download the full text from the "Files" tab.
• Fill out the Reviewer Evaluation Form by clicking on the "Evaluation" tab in the panel.
• In the article panel, click the "Evaluation" tab, fill out the form located at the bottom of the page, and click the "Submit Evaluation" button to complete the process.
• After this process, you should see the message "Your transaction has been successfully completed" at the top of the page. If you do not see this message, the form has not been sent.
• Please check if there are any fields in the form that were required but left blank. After completing any missing parts, you can send the form by clicking the "Submit Evaluation" button.

Conduct and Ethics:

• Reviewer evaluations should be objective and constructive, avoiding hostile or inflammatory language and derogatory personal comments.
• Reviewers can communicate with the editor via the DergiPark messages section to receive further guidance or to report any suspicion of a violation. Correspondence here is not seen by the authors.
• For articles based on field research or data analysis, the data may be requested from the editor by the reviewer to soundly evaluate the analyses in the article. The journal editor will contact the author regarding this matter and transmit the data to the reviewer.
• Reviewers must not have any conflict of interest regarding the research, authors, and/or research funders. If a conflict of interest is foreseen, the reviewer must contact the editorial board and indicate the potential conflict of interest situation.
• Reviewers cannot benefit from the data of the articles they review before publication, nor can they share this data with others.
• Information contained in the study must not be used by a reviewer in their own research without the explicit written permission of the author.
• The names of the reviewers evaluating for the journal are not disclosed/published.

• Are the Turkish and English titles of the article parallel to each other and suitable for the study?
• Are the Turkish and English abstracts compatible with each other and do they summarize the study appropriately?
• Are the research method(s) used suitable for the subject of the study?
• Does the content of the article meet the research objective?
• Has the literature been utilized at a sufficient level?
• Is the study presented in fluent and understandable language in accordance with Turkish/English grammar rules?
• Are the research findings discussed sufficiently?
• Is the conclusion part suitable for the purpose and scope of the study?
• Does the reviewed article contribute to the literature?

• You are expected to write opinions that are as detailed as possible in the "Suggestions to Author" and "Comments to Editor" sections.
• Reports that do not contain concrete justification, suggestions, or criticism regarding the content of the article will not be taken into account in decision-making.
• All your selections and writings except "Comments to Editor" are transmitted to the author. Therefore, care should be taken not to include information that could violate the blind peer review process in this field.

3. Decision and Revision Process

• Major changes are required in the text (Major Revision).
• Few corrections are required in the text (Minor Revision).
• The text is not suitable for publication (Reject).
• The text can be published as is (Accept).

• It can be published after editor control once the author corrects it.
• I want to see the correction made by the author. (When this option is checked, the article is directed to you for re-evaluation after the author completes the correction).
• It can be published without being checked after the author makes the correction.
• It can be published even if the author does not make the corrections.

4. Post-Revision Evaluation (Second Round)

• Has/Have the author(s) responded clearly and adequately to the criticisms and suggestions in the previous reviewer report?
• Has/Have the author(s) made the necessary and satisfactory corrections considering the criticisms and suggestions in the previous reviewer report?
• Have the corrections made contributed to the scientific consistency and clarity of the article?
• Are the general integrity and academic writing language of the study at a satisfactory level after the revision?

5. Regarding Deadlines

• Invitation Response Period: The time given to accept or decline the review is 10 days.
• Evaluation Period: The time given for reviewers who accept the invitation to complete the evaluation is 20 days.
• Additional Time: A reviewer who cannot complete the evaluation within this period may be granted up to 7 days of additional time upon request.
• Revision Evaluation Period: A reviewer who wants to see the article again after revision is granted another 20 days for the second evaluation.

6. File Upload and Confidentiality

• If you have taken notes on the article, you can use the "Review" > "Track Changes" feature in the Word file.
• Privacy of Personal Data: Before uploading the file to the system, ensure that you delete your personal information (Author name) from the file properties so that the author does not access reviewer information. (Path: “File > Info > Check for Issues > Inspect Document > Inspect > Document Properties and Personal Information > Remove All” or “Tools > Protect Document > Privacy > Remove personal information from this file on save”).
• Information contained in the study cannot be used by the reviewer or shared with third parties without the explicit written permission of the author.

7. Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

• It is not possible to upload the texts sent to our reviewers to artificial intelligence tools, either completely or partially.
• It is important to show care in this regard, especially to avoid problems in terms of intellectual property rights.