The review of all papers by double blind peer reviewers directly affect the publication quality. This process provides confidence for the objective and independent review of the publication. LEGAL's review process runs with the double blind peer review principle. Peer reviewers may not directly get in touch with the authors; evaluation, and comments would be communicated through the journal's administration system. Meanwhile, review forms, and the peer reviewer comments on the paper would be communicated to the author by the editor. At this juncture, the peer reviewers who would be reviewing the papers for LEGAL are expected to comply with the following ethical responsibilities:
* They must only accept to review a paper that relates to their area of expertise;
* They must evaluate objectively and confidentially;
* They must abstain from examining the paper, and they must notify the editor of the Journal, during reviewing if it appears that there is a conflict of interest;
*They must review objectively, only with an eye to the content of the paper. Nationality, gender, religious beliefs, political thoughts, and commercial concerns must not affect the review;
* They must use a positive review language. S/he should not use personal comments that involve animosity, slander, and falsehood.
*They must submit the paper they reviewed on time, and by complying with the above ethical responsibilities.