All submissions to Politics and Security Governance are pre-screened by the editorial team to ensure alignment with the journal’s scope, policies, and formatting guidelines before proceeding to peer review.

Authors may suggest up to three academically qualified reviewers for consideration. Authors may also indicate any individuals they prefer to exclude from the review process, accompanied by a rationale. While reviewer suggestions are welcome, the editorial team maintains full discretion and cannot guarantee that any recommended reviewers will be invited, in order to uphold the integrity and impartiality of the peer review process.

The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for determining whether a submission proceeds to peer review. Reviewers—either members of the editorial board or external experts—will be assigned based on subject relevance. The journal employs a double-blind peer review process, ensuring that both authors and reviewers remain anonymous throughout.

Based on the reviewers’ reports and recommendations, the Editor-in-Chief will make one of the following decisions:

• Accept
• Minor revision
• Major revision
• Reject

If minor revisions are requested, authors are expected to submit a revised manuscript within 30 days, including a revised manuscript file, title page, and a detailed response or rebuttal letter addressing reviewer comments. For major revisions, authors are given up to 60 days to resubmit these materials. All revised submissions will be re-evaluated—first through editorial screening, then, where appropriate, by the original or new reviewers.

The peer review process concludes upon formal acceptance of the manuscript. Accepted papers will then proceed to copy-editing, typesetting, and proofreading before being published online.

For a full description of the editorial and review workflow, please refer to the Porcelain Publishing Editorial Process.