Review policy
Within three weeks of submission each text is being assessed by the Editorial Board. Opinion contains a request for a review or rejection due to formal defects.
Then, each paper (after removing the author’s personal details) receives the opinion of one of the editors of “Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego”.
Having received a positive opinion, the paper is sent to two external reviewers. In case the paper receives a negative opinion, chief editor sends it to an additional external reviewer.
Reviewer in the review answer the following questions:
- Does the text meets the requirements set out in Art. 2 of the “Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego” statute, which is promotion of knowledge about the state, the constitutional law and political systems?
- Does the contents of the text correspond to the title?
- Are the goals and the research objectives of the article clearly defined in the introduction?
- Is the article of a scientific, practical or educational value?
- Is the text layout correct?
- Does the structure of the article meet the requirements for a scientific text
- Does the text present an original research problem?
- Does the summary of the text indicate goals, contain main theses and conclusions?
- Are the results of the study scientifically, practically or educationally interesting?
- What's new brings a reviewed text for science, education, practice?
- Are the problems presented in the article worth further study?
- Is the language used in the text correct?
- Has the Author mastered the technique of writing scientific texts?
- Is the bibliographic notation system consistent with the technical guidelines of “Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego”?
- Is the selection of sources appropriate and complete?
In the conclusion of the review, the Reviewer chooses one of four options:
- Text accepted for publication with no need for corrections
- Text accepted for publication after some minor corrections, without the need for a re-review
- Text accepted for publication after significant corrections and a re-review
- Text is not suitable for publication
Within three months of submission of the text the author receives its review (without personal data of the reviewer) and information regarding further publishing procedure.
If the text is not returned from the correction within the prescribed period, the text is rejected.
In the case of thematic profiling of individual PPK numbers, the qualified text is published in accordance with its substantive content.
Reviewers of the "Review of Constitutional Law"
Arkadiusz Adamczyk, Alberski Robert, Michał Bartoszewicz, Andrzej Bałaban, Michał Bernaczyk, Mariusz Bidziński, Grzegorz Bonusiak, Michał Bożek, Stanisław Bożyk, Maria Bujňakova, Anna Chorążewska, Jerzy Ciapała, Rafał Czachor, Gabriela Dobrovičova, Aldona Domańska, Timea Drinoczi, Bożena Dziemidok-Olszewska, Monika Florczak-Wątor, Krzysztof Grajewski, Mirosław Granat, Ivan Halasz, Mariusz Jabłoński, Lech Jamróz, Jerzy Jaskiernia, Agnė Juškevičiūtė-Vilienė, Maria Kiovska, Grzegorz Koksanowicz, Bogusław Kotarba, Aneta Kowalczyk, Krzysztof Kowalczyk, Tomasza Koziełło, Izabela Kraśnicka, Krzysztof Krysieniel, Katarzyna Kubuj, Grzegorz Kuca, Elżbieta Kużelewska, Przemysław Maj, Krzysztof Malinowski, Grzegorz Maroń, Małgorzata Masternak-Kubiak, Jarosław Matwiejuk, Bartłomiej Michalak, Magdalena Musiał-Karg, Ladislav Orosz, Grzegorz Pastuszko, Agnieszka Pawłowska, Danuta Plecka, Renata Podgórzańska, Boguslaw Przywora, Anna Rakowska-Trela, Anna Rytel-Warzocha, Viktoria Serzhanova, Krzysztof Skotnicki, Konrad Składowski, Jacek Sobczak, Ľudmila Somorova, Tomasz Słomka, Monika Urbaniak, Marcin Wiącek, Marcin Wiszowaty, Jacek Wojnicki, Andrzej Zapałowski, Krzysztof Żarna, Sylwia Żukowska-Jarosz
