Before initiating the peer-review process, the Editor-in-Chief will assign the submitted manuscript to a Managing Editor and additional Associate Editors for preliminary evaluation. This initial assessment ensures that the manuscript aligns with the journal’s scope, meets basic quality standards, and is ready to be sent for external review. The editorial team reserves the right to reject any manuscript that does not meet these standards or falls outside the journal’s scope.

The Managing Editor, together with any assigned Associate Editors, will invite at least two qualified reviewers to evaluate the manuscript. All manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer-review process, ensuring that both author and reviewer identities remain concealed throughout the review to maintain academic objectivity and integrity.

The review process evaluates the novelty, originality, objectivity, methodology, scientific contribution, and conclusion of the manuscript. Reviewer comments are forwarded to the corresponding author for necessary revisions and responses. The Editorial Board assesses the reviewers’ recommendations and issues the final decision regarding the manuscript. Reviewers are selected based on expertise, experience, and professional qualifications, and the journal maintains a diverse pool of national and international reviewers to ensure high-quality and impartial evaluations.

All submissions and review reports are treated as confidential. Reviewers are prohibited from sharing or using any content from the manuscripts for personal or professional gain. They are expected to provide constructive, unbiased, and timely feedback, declare any potential conflicts of interest, and recuse themselves when necessary. The journal upholds strict publication ethics, including the prevention of plagiarism, data fabrication, and other unethical practices, and reviewers are required to support these standards. Pancasila: Jurnal Keindonesiaan requires all editors, authors, and reviewers to use the electronic submission system for all editorial communications and to employ the journal’s plagiarism screening tools (Turnitin Similarity Check/iThenticate).

Based on the reviewers’ recommendations, the Editorial Board makes the final decision to accept, request revisions, or reject a manuscript. Authors are notified of the decision along with anonymized reviewer comments. The Editor or Editorial Board thoroughly considers all reviewer feedback before reaching the final determination. The following are the most common decisions:

• Accepted by Minor Revisions, the journal will publish the paper and asks the author to make small corrections (let authors revised with stipulated time);
• Accepted by Major Revisions, the journal will publish the paper provided the authors make the changes suggested by the reviewers and/or editors (let authors revised with stipulated time);
• Resubmit (conditional rejection), the journal is willing to reconsider the paper in another round of decision making after the authors make major changes;
• Rejected (outright rejection), the journal will not publish the paper or reconsider it even if the authors make major revisions.