All papers submitted to the APHTN-HAN Proceedings are initially received by the Editor-in-Chief and the Managing Editor as part of the APHTN-HAN Conference Committee. Each submission undergoes a double-blind peer review process conducted by reviewers comprising qualified legal experts in the relevant fields. Once a paper has been accepted through the peer review stage, it will be presented by the author(s) at the APHTN-HAN National Conference. During the conference, the paper will receive additional feedback and constructive comments from appointed panelists to further enhance its academic quality prior to final publication.

Upon submission, all manuscripts are initially assessed by the Editor-in-Chief and the Managing Editor as part of the APHTN-HAN Conference Committee. At this stage, manuscripts are examined to ensure compliance with the submission guidelines, as well as the focus, scope, and academic standards of the APHTN-HAN Proceedings. Authors may be requested to revise their manuscripts before proceeding to the next stage. Manuscripts that do not meet the required standards may be rejected at this stage.

Manuscripts that successfully pass the desk review stage will undergo a double-blind anonymous peer review process conducted by reviewers comprising qualified legal experts in the relevant fields. Each manuscript will be reviewed by two independent and anonymous reviewers. The review process is generally completed within two weeks. Manuscripts that fail to pass the desk review stage will not proceed to peer review.

The reviewers may provide one of the following recommendations:

• Accepted: the manuscript is accepted for conference presentation without revision.
• Accepted with Minor Revisions: the manuscript is accepted for conference presentation subject to minor revisions addressing the reviewers’ comments.
• Accepted with Major Revisions: the manuscript requires substantial revisions, including but not limited to theoretical framework, data analysis, argumentation, or restructuring of the manuscript.
• Rejected: the manuscript is not suitable for conference presentation due to fundamental academic or methodological concerns.

The reviewers’ recommendations will be considered by the Board of Editors in determining the subsequent editorial decision.

Manuscripts requiring revisions will be returned to the author(s) together with the reviewers’ comments and evaluation summary. Authors of manuscripts accepted with major revisions will be given three weeks to complete the revisions, while authors of manuscripts accepted with minor revisions will be given one week. Revised manuscripts must be resubmitted together with a response to the reviewers’ comments.

Manuscripts that have successfully passed the peer review process and received editorial acceptance will be presented by the author(s) at the APHTN-HAN National Conference (Konferensi Nasional APHTN-HAN). During the conference, the papers will receive additional academic feedback and constructive input from appointed panelists to further strengthen and refine their scholarly quality prior to publication.

Following the revision and conference presentation stages, the Board of Editors will conduct a final evaluation to ensure that the reviewers’ and panelists’ comments have been adequately addressed. The manuscript may still be rejected if the revisions are deemed insufficient or fail to meet the required academic standards.

Accepted manuscripts will undergo a proofreading and language editing process to ensure clarity, consistency, and linguistic quality prior to publication.

Before publication, the final layout of the manuscript will be sent to the author(s) for confirmation. At this stage, authors may only correct typographical or formatting errors. Upon receiving the author’s confirmation, the Editorial Secretary will proceed with both the online and print publication of the manuscript in the APHTN-HAN Proceedings.