The manuscript submission process for Qisth: Jurnal Studi dan Penelitian Hukum Islam (Qisth) follows a structured series of steps designed to ensure a thorough and impartial peer-review process.

1. Manuscript Submission

Authors submit their research articles to the journal. The Editor-in-Chief then assigns the manuscript to the Managing Editor for further processing.

2. Manuscript Check and Selection

The Managing Editor, together with the editorial team, conducts an initial screening of the manuscript. At this stage, the manuscript may be accepted directly, rejected, or forwarded to the review stage. A plagiarism check is conducted for every submission using Turnitin.

3. Manuscript Reviewing Process

The Managing Editor assigns the manuscript to at least two experts in the relevant field for evaluation. The review process is conducted under a double-blind system, ensuring that both reviewers and authors remain anonymous to each other. Reviewers use a standardized review form adopted from the Malaysian Journal of Syariah and Law.

4. Notification of Manuscript Acceptance, Revision, or Rejection

Based on the reviewers’ evaluations, the Editor-in-Chief communicates the decision to the author, which may be acceptance, a request for revision, or rejection, while maintaining reviewer anonymity.

5. Paper Revision

If revisions are requested, the author is given the opportunity to revise the manuscript according to the reviewers’ comments and suggestions. Authors may also submit a response letter addressing each reviewer’s comment and explaining the changes made.

6. Revision Submission Based on Reviewer Suggestions

Once revisions are completed, the author resubmits the manuscript through the same submission route as in Step 1.

7. Notification of Acceptance

If the reviewers are satisfied with the revisions, the editor issues a notification of acceptance for publication.

8. Galley Proof and Publishing Process

The accepted manuscript moves to the galley proof stage, where formatting, copyediting, and proofreading are conducted. Once finalized, the article is published either in print or online, according to the journal’s publishing format.

Peer-Review Decision Outcomes

The steps above represent one full cycle of the peer-review process. The Editor-in-Chief and the editorial board carefully evaluate reviewer feedback before making a final decision. Possible outcomes include:

• Accepted as It Is: The manuscript is approved for publication in its current form.
• Accepted with Minor Revisions: The manuscript is accepted, but the author must make small corrections within a given timeframe.
• Accepted with Major Revisions: The manuscript is accepted conditionally; the author must address substantial revisions as suggested by reviewers and/or editors within the specified period.
• Resubmit (Conditional Rejection): The journal may reconsider the manuscript after significant revisions, but it is treated as a new submission in the decision-making process.
• Rejected (Outright Rejection): The manuscript is deemed unsuitable for publication, even with substantial revisions.

Workflow Summary

The submission-to-publication process can be summarized in the following sequence:

1. Manuscript Submission by the author (Route 1)
2. Manuscript Check and Selection by the Managing Editor and editors (Route 2), including Turnitin plagiarism screening
3. Manuscript Reviewing Process by reviewers (Routes 3–4)
4. Notification of Acceptance, Revision, or Rejection by the editor based on reviewer feedback (Route 5)
5. Paper Revision by the author
6. Resubmission of Revised Manuscript by the author, following the same submission path (Route 1)
7. If reviewers are satisfied, Notification of Acceptance is issued by the editor (Route 6)
8. Galley Proof Preparation and Publishing Process (Routes 7–8)