This page explains who decides on a manuscript in a Peninsula journal, at what stage, and what protects that decision from commercial, organisational, political and personal pressure. It sets out the editorial assessment section of the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (version 5, 2026) and COPE’s position on editorial independence.
Who decides
Each journal has an Editor-in-Chief, named on that journal’s Editorial Team page. The Editor-in-Chief is accountable for everything the journal publishes. A manuscript is handled by one editor, either the Editor-in-Chief or an associate or section editor to whom the Editor-in-Chief delegates it. That handling editor makes the decision after reading the reviewers’ reports. Where reports conflict, or the manuscript raises an ethical question, the Editor-in-Chief takes the final decision. Decisions are not made by vote of the board.
Peninsula Publishing L.L.C., its owner and its publishing office do not accept, reject or rank manuscripts and cannot overrule an editor’s decision on a manuscript. The publishing office may raise an integrity concern with an editor, for example about image duplication or a paper-mill pattern seen across several journals, but the decision on the manuscript remains the editor’s.
Stages at which a decision is made
- Initial check by the editorial office. Completeness, formatting, declarations and similarity screening. A manuscript can be returned to the authors for correction at this stage. It is not rejected by staff.
- Editor’s assessment. The handling editor decides whether the manuscript is within scope and of sufficient quality to send for review. A manuscript may be rejected at this stage without external review (desk rejection). The authors are told the reason.
- Peer review. At least three independent reviewers are invited, as described under Peer Review.
- Decision. Accept, minor revision, major revision or reject, made by the handling editor and, where needed, confirmed by the Editor-in-Chief.
- Post-publication. Corrections, expressions of concern and retractions are decided by the Editor-in-Chief, as described under Editorial Policies.
No journal guarantees acceptance of a submission, and no one acting for a Peninsula journal may promise acceptance, a publication date or a review time in exchange for payment.
What the decision may and may not rest on
The decision rests on scholarly merit: the importance, originality, validity and clarity of the work, and its relevance to the journal’s scope. It must not be affected by:
- the nationality, ethnicity, race, religion, political beliefs, sex, gender or institution of the authors;
- the authors’ ability to pay the article processing charge;
- the interests of the owner, a funder, a government, or any other organisation;
- the effect of the article on the journal’s citations or metrics.
Payments and editorial decisions are kept apart
The article processing charge is invoiced and collected by the publishing office after acceptance. Editors, guest editors and reviewers are not told whether an invoice has been raised or paid, and have no access to payment records. No person who makes decisions on individual articles is involved in invoicing or payment.
Editors are not paid per accepted article, and no editor or member of staff receives a bonus, commission or other benefit linked to the number of articles accepted. No acceptance or volume targets are set for editors.
Geopolitical and external pressure
Editors do not reject or delay a manuscript because of the country or institution of its authors, sanctions on a country, or a political position expressed in good faith in the work. If a government, institution, funder or other party tries to influence a decision, the editor tells the publishing office, the attempt is recorded, and the decision is made on merit. Peninsula follows COPE’s position on geopolitical intrusions on editorial decisions and the WAME statement on geopolitical intrusion. Where a legal restriction, such as a sanctions law, affects how the publisher can deal with an author, Peninsula says so to the author and does not present it as an editorial judgement.
The owner and the editors
Peninsula Publishing L.L.C. owns the journals. Its owner and publisher, Dr. Akhmed Kaleel, is responsible for the business, the platform and these policies. He appoints Editors-in-Chief, and he may end an appointment for failure to follow these policies, but not because of a decision on a manuscript.
Dr. Kaleel is also Editor-in-Chief of MEDAAD. That dual role is disclosed here and on Publishing Staff. Any MEDAAD manuscript in which he has an interest, including his own work, work by a co-author of the last three years, or work from an institution where he holds a post, is handled from start to finish by another member of the MEDAAD editorial board. He does not see the reviews and does not take part in the decision. The article then carries an editorial note naming the handling editor.
Editors’ and board members’ own manuscripts
Editors and board members may publish in their own journal, but only through the normal route. The manuscript is assigned to an editor who has no conflict with it; the author cannot see who reviewed it or take part in the decision; and the published article carries a note stating that the manuscript was handled by an independent editor, and naming that editor. The rules are set out under Conflict of Interest.
Article types that are not peer reviewed
Editorials, editor’s notes, corrections, retraction notices and expressions of concern are not externally peer reviewed. They are labelled “Not peer reviewed” on the article page. If an article of a type that is normally reviewed is published without external review, the article states that and states what assessment it received.
Special issues and guest editors
A special issue is proposed to the Editor-in-Chief, who approves its topic and its guest editors after checking their record and any conflicts. Guest editors are given these policies in writing, and a briefing from the Editor-in-Chief on the journal’s peer-review process, on selecting reviewers, on what counts as a conflict of interest, on how to deal with an unacceptable review, and on how to write a decision letter. Guest editors may not handle manuscripts by themselves, by their own institution’s staff, or by recent co-authors. Every special-issue manuscript goes through the same peer review as any other, and the Editor-in-Chief approves the final decision on each one. Special issues follow COPE’s guidance on guest edited collections.
Use of automated tools by the editorial office
The editorial office uses Turnitin to check similarity, including Turnitin’s indicator of AI-generated text, and uses the ScholarOne system to manage submissions. These tools inform an editor; they do not decide. A similarity or AI-indicator score is never, by itself, the reason for a rejection. Editors and staff do not use generative AI to assess a manuscript, choose reviewers, write a decision letter or generate requests for revision. The full statement is on Generative AI.
Accessibility, diversity, equity and inclusion
The publisher supports editors in building boards and reviewer pools that reflect the range of the field, including across regions, institutions and genders, and periodically reviews each board for relevance and balance. The website and articles are published in formats that can be read with assistive technologies. Inclusive and non-discriminatory language is expected in manuscripts and in reviews.
Editors are available
Authors and reviewers may contact the handling editor through the submission system, or the publishing office at support@peninsula-press.ae, with questions about the process. Appeals and complaints follow Complaints and Appeals.
Peninsula Publishing Press · Peninsula Publishing L.L.C., Dubai · support@peninsula-press.ae · Version 2.0, in force 1 November 2026, superseding version 1.0 of 30 October 2026. These publisher-level policies consolidate the policies each journal has published on its own site since 2023.
Peninsula Publishing Press follows guidance from COPE and the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, version 5 (2026). Peninsula is not a member of COPE, and nothing on this site should be read as claiming membership.
