Decision Process

Editorial decisions are made by the Editor-in-Chief or by a decision editor who has been explicitly authorized and has no conflict of interest. Reviewer recommendations inform the decision, but they do not determine it by vote.

1. Initial Assessment
The editorial office checks that each submission is administratively complete, as described in the [Author Guidelines]. The Editor-in-Chief or an assigned scholarly editor then assesses the manuscript’s scope, its potential contribution, and its suitability for external review.

The editorial office handles administration and communicates decisions once they have been authorized. Scholarly assessment or decision-making authority requires a separate, explicit assignment, as set out in the [Editorial Roles] policy.

A manuscript may be returned for administrative corrections or rejected without external review. Integrity checks follow the [Publication Ethics] policy and may take place at any stage when there is a justified reason.

2. Assessment of Review Evidence
The decision editor considers the manuscript, the quality and reasoning of the reviewer reports, the handling editor’s recommendation, and the author’s responses where these are available. The required number of reviews is set out in the [Review Model].

When reports conflict, the decision editor may conduct further editorial analysis or invite an additional independent reviewer. Reports that are unusable or compromised do not count as adequate assessment. Additional reviews must address a specific identified need and are never sought simply to obtain a preferred recommendation.

3. Decision Categories

• Accept: The manuscript meets the scholarly requirements and moves on to production and technical checks.
• Accept with Minor Revisions: Limited changes are needed before the final decision is confirmed.
• Revise and Resubmit (Major Revisions): Substantial changes are required, and the revised manuscript may need further external review.
• Reject: The manuscript is not accepted. The decision letter explains the main grounds for rejection.

4. Communication and Timing
Decisions are recorded in the editorial system and communicated through official journal correspondence. Relevant reviewer comments and revision instructions accompany the decision, subject to confidentiality safeguards.

Al-Muhafidz does not guarantee acceptance. Timing depends on the availability of reviewers, the complexity of the manuscript, and the number of revision cycles. The expected timelines for each stage are described in the [Peer Review Process]. If a delay is substantial, the editor will explain the reason and the next steps, and the author may request withdrawal of the manuscript.

Payment or waiver status does not affect the decision. Fees follow the [Author Fees] policy. If serious new concerns arise after acceptance, the journal may pause publication for a documented assessment. Any change to a published article follows the [Correction and Retraction] policy.