​

• Exclusive submission policy: The submission should be the original and unpublished work of the author and should not be simultaneously considered by any other publications.

​

• Plagiarism policy: The submissions will be run through plagiarism detection software and submissions with more than 10% plagiarism will be rejected.

​

• Authorship and double-blind peer review: Manuscripts submitted to the journal must not be co-authored by more than two persons. Authors are permitted to send only one submission for the author or team of co-authors. The Submission will go through a rigorous double-blind peer review. Thus, the manuscripts should not contain any information relating to the identity of the author. The personal details of the author should be only submitted through the google form

​

• Indemnity for liability: Submissions are accepted for publication on the basis that they do not violate the copyright or any other rights of a third party and do not include any obscene, offensive, defamatory, or racially insensitive content. The Editorial Board will check for plagiarism in all contributions. Submissions that are infringing, offensive, or plagiarised will be subject to rejection.

​

• Copyright policy: By sending the submissions to MNLUA Journal, the author(s) agree to assign exclusive copyright in the work to MNLUA. It shall be entitled to, without limitation, publish and reproduce the submission (or part(s) thereof) in any manner it sees fit (with due acknowledgement to the author) subject to the doctrine of fair use as enumerated under the Copyright Act.

​

• Open access statement: The MNLUA Law Review is devoted to academic open access. All papers published in the MNLUA Law Review are instantly and publicly available upon publication. Prior to publication, neither authors nor readers are charged for viewing and downloading our articles for their own personal use.

​

• Timeline: Within four weeks of submission, all authors will receive an acknowledgement of receipt for their work. In the event that a contribution is not accepted after going through all stages of the review process or is denied for any other reason, the author will be notified by email. The decision of the Editorial Board will be final.

​

• Parameters for Evaluation

​

       A. Technical Review

• Submissions to the MNLUA Student Law Review must be original and free of any instances of plagiarism. Every work will be submitted to a two-stage plagiarism check, which is the first level of evaluation. The Editorial Board maintains the exclusive authority to reject a paper without review if plagiarism is discovered.

​

• A manuscript without footnotes will be rejected at Stage I of the Plagiarism Check because it does not match the Law Review's basic requirements. 

​

• Plagiarism includes both paraphrasing and word-for-word copying of another author's work without proper citation of sources. 

• Any instances of plagiarism in the abstract or conclusion of the paper are grounds for prompt rejection. 

​

• Secondary plagiarism (plagiarism of the sources used) is grounds for prompt manuscript disqualification.

​

​       B. Content Review

• Manuscripts that pass Technical Review are next subjected to Content Review. The Content Review is undertaken in two phases, with the submissions that are publication-ready as-is or do not need substantial revisions being shortlisted for Peer Review. Content Review evaluates manuscripts based on the following five criteria:

​

​      1. Grammar and Language

• The language used in the document must be concise and clear. A straightforward statement or argument would be favoured over an oblique one and little utilisation of passive voice is encouraged. The author(s) must understand the meaning of each phrase used in the document. The author(s) may receive a lower grade for needless repetition, wordiness, and unnecessary rhetoric.

​

​       2. Structure and Logical Coherence

• The manuscript must be logically sound and relevant to the goal it tries to accomplish. Arguments based on faulty premises or presumptions, a lack of a clear framework, or a lack of adequate logical flow may result in the author(s) being marked down.

​

​       3. Contribution to Existing Literature

• The author(s) must take into account the manuscript's contribution to the discussion if the subject has been thoroughly covered in previous writing. It would not be sufficient to just cite and/or summarise prior cases. On the other hand, it would be praised if the writer used more creative writing techniques and offered a fresh explanation or interpretation of an idea.

​

​       4. Contemporary Relevance

• Recent advancements in the subject are expected to be included in manuscripts. When a work addresses current social difficulties and unrecognised legal matters, it is seen to be of contemporary significance. Another possibility is that the subject has previously been discussed but has just come to light for whatever reason. The author(s) should emphasise in the opening how important the specific issue is.

​

       5. Referencing and Research

• The manuscript must represent in-depth study rather than shallow research. The author must be aware of what citation is necessary in the circumstances, when to cite (and when not to cite), and the importance of that reference.

 

 

MNLUA Citation Standard and Style Sheet