All submitted texts are first assessed by the editors of the journal. If the chosen topic is relevant for an upcoming issue, the article is sent for peer review.

Submitted texts are evaluated using the double-blind review system whereby the identity of the author remains hidden from the two anonymous referees and vice versa. Therefore, authors should remove all self-identification material from the version of the text that will be peer-reviewed. Editors mediate all interactions between reviewers and authors.

When an article is assessed for publication, the main criteria are:

• originality in framing the topic
• relevancy and depth of discussion
• accuracy of argumentation
• the structure of the text
• compliance with the chosen topic of the issue
• appropriately chosen examples, sources, literature.

Once a referee has critically assessed a text, she/he may respond in several ways. A referee may consider the article ready for publishing without any changes, or with very minor editorial amendments. A referee may consider the text suitable for printing, however it requires formatting adjustments, a more developed argumentation, etc. Conversely, a referee may consider that the article is not suitable for printing. Afterwards, the articles, together with the opinions offered by the reviewers, are once more the subject of the editorial team’s consideration.

For a text to be accepted for publication, it needs two positive opinions. In the case of a disagreement, the text will be sent to a third referee whose decision will be final. The reviewed text is then sent back to the author, who is required to make the necessary amendments and additions as suggested by the referees.

The final decision on whether to publish the paper belongs to the Editor-in-Chief of the journal.

At the end of each year, a list of all the reviewers contributing to the past two issues is published so as to manifest the high standing and the variety of scholars and institutions involved.