Ethics Statement

Review of Human Rights (RHR)

Publication Ethics and Mal-Practice Statement


The Review of Human Rights (RHR) is an academic research initiative of the Society of Social Science Academics. The journal is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal devoted to research in the field of human rights broadly conceived. It seeks to engage in critical study of existing approaches to human rights, as well as developing new methods on the theory and practice of human rights. The journal strives to meet the growing academic need and interest in the study and practice of human rights in the developing world, especially the war–torn countries. The Journal aims to serve as an arena for the public discussion and scholarly analysis of human rights.

Moreover, the Journal is committed to theoretical and ideological diversity in the study of human rights. Accordingly, the editor welcomes papers not only from scholars and disciplines traditionally associated with the study of human rights, but also from those in other disciplines in social science and humanities. The editor also welcomes ideas for special issues and symposia.

RHR is committed to meeting and upholding the standard of ethical behavior at all stages of the publication process. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is expected of all parties involved: authors, editors and reviewers.

Furthermore, this ethics and malpractice statement sets out the specific responsibilities for all parties involved to ensure that RHR complies with internationally accepted guidelines on carrying out ethical and culturally competent research.


Author(s) Guidelines:

  1. A full-length article should be around 8,000 words, but should not exceed 10,000 words, including references.
  2. A Focus essay—which we define as an essay written on an event, concept, or theory of enduring significance and for providing initial thesis or creating understanding--should be around 4,000 words. Both type of articles will go through similar double-blind peer review process.
  3. Author(s) should present an accurate account of the research performed, and offer an objective discussion of its significance.
  4. RHR follows Chicago Manual of Style for referencing and citation. Citations should use short note in End Notes and a detailed Reference section at the end.
  5. Authorship should be limited to those who have made some significant contribution to the conception, design, execution or interpretation of the submitted study.
  6. The author(s) are required to submit a Similarity Index Report by using the service of It is required to ensure the originality of work.
  7. The manuscript should offer new, original insights or interpretations that have not been published before or are not under consideration for publication at any other journal.
  8. Author(s) should declare all funding sources and any actual or potential conflicts including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people and organizations.
  9. Author(s) are required to sign an agreement the originality of work and its copyrights with the journal.


Duties of Editors

  1. Editors will examine all the submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit: significance, timeliness, relevance, originality, and clarity. They would not take into account the author’s race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious beliefs or institutional affiliation.  The editors will guard the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct when needed.
  2. Editors and staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher as necessary.
  3. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in any editor’s own research. The editors should will ensure a fair and appropriate double-blind peer- review process: HEC Pakistan requires two international and one national review, which will be followed.
  4. Submissions from authors with which the editors have any conflict of interest will be assessed by a member of the Editorial Board. Submissions by members of the Editorial Board will be assigned to an Associate or Guest Editor to ensure a fair and appropriate process. The editors will require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication.
  5. The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo double-blind peer-review by at least two international reviewers and one national reviewer (Pakistan) as required by HEC Pakistan. The reviewers must be experts in the field. The Editor is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The Editor confers with associate editors and/or reviewers in making this decision.


Duties of Reviewers

Double-blind peer review (two international and one national as required by HEC Pakistan) assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

  1. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
  2. Any manuscript received for review is treated as confidential document.
  3. Double-blind peer reviews are conducted objectively. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  4. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  5. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author.

Duties of Publisher

  1. In cases of alleged or proven misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work.
  2. The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintain own digital archive.
  3. If an inaccuracy, misleading text or wrong explanations are found in the published article, it must be corrected promptly.
  4. All complaints will be seriously investigated by the editor regardless of who files the complaint.