Texts submitted for inclusion in any issue of the Journal must undergo two processes: 1) content validation and 2) double-blind peer review.

• Content validation consists of a review by the co-editor responsible for content review to determine the quality and rigor of the topic selection, methodology, structure, critical apparatus, and suitability for publication of each submitted article. Depending on the subject matter and level of specialization, the same co-editor may also submit the article for content review and potential validation through double-blind peer review, in accordance with the Journal's editorial policy and guidelines outlined herein. In both cases, each article must undergo double-blind peer review, and content validation is not complete until the articles to be included in each issue have been selected.

• The peer review process evaluates the content of submitted articles. Through double-blind review, two experts are selected by the co-editor, preferably from the Law School's Editorial Committee, the Reviewers' Committee, Seminars, and/or Faculty Associations, or, if applicable, any expert with a distinguished academic and/or professional background in the specific area of ​​legal study addressed by the article. Upon selection, the reviewers receive a review form, which they must complete according to the Reviewers' Manual. Their objective is to determine, based on their experience and knowledge, in a reasoned and well-reasoned manner: 1) the text is publishable as submitted; 2) the text is acceptable with minor suggestions, generally stylistic; 3) the text must be substantially modified to be publishable; 4) the text is not publishable. See REVIEWERS' MANUAL AND FORMAT.