Editorial Process

Overview

UHURU: The McGill Journal of African Studies uses a structured, panel-based editorial and peer review system to ensure that all submissions receive thorough, fair, and constructive evaluation. Our process is designed to be collaborative, transparent, and deeply supportive of emerging scholars whose work centers perspectives from Africa and the African diaspora. Every submission moves through a clearly defined sequence — from initial screening to peer review, author revision, and final publication — so that both authors and editors can engage with confidence and clarity at each stage.

Stage 1: Initial Editorial Screening

All received submissions are first read and evaluated by the Uhuru Editorial Board, on the basis of the publication criteria set out in the Author Instructions. The Board assesses each submission for clarity of argument, originality, relevance to the journal's mandate and annual theme, organization and structure, citation quality, and overall coherence of writing. Submissions that do not meet the threshold for shortlisting are returned to their authors. Authors may request a written evaluation of their manuscript at this stage, and they remain free to submit revised versions at any time.

Stage 2: Panel Assignment

Shortlisted submissions proceed to the peer review stage. Each article, along with any supplementary material, is assigned to a rotating editorial panel of two to four editors. Panels are composed to ensure a balanced workload, alignment with editors' areas of interest, and a diversity of perspectives within each review group. The Editorial Board oversees all assignments to maintain fairness and consistency across the review cycle.

Stage 3: Peer Review

UHURU employs a double-blind (anonymous) peer-review process: reviewers do not know the identities of a submission's authors, and authors do not know the identities of their reviewers. Copies of the manuscript are sent to selected reviewers, as well as to knowledgeable professors or graduate students in the relevant field (UHURU's Faculty Advisors), who evaluate the work independently. Authors may recommend the inclusion or exclusion of specific reviewers; however, UHURU does not guarantee that these recommendations will be followed.

Panels conduct their review collaboratively in shared Google Docs, using comments to suggest conceptual or structural revisions, suggestions mode for line edits and citation corrections, and highlighting to flag sections that need additional support, clarification, or reorganization. Editors are encouraged to discuss major recommendations with one another before finalizing feedback, so that authors receive unified and coherent direction.

Upon receipt of all reviews, the Editorial Board combines the reviewers' comments with its own assessment to reach a collective decision on the article's suitability for publication. Final responsibility for acceptance or rejection rests with the editors.

Stage 4: Author Communication & Revision

The editorial decision — along with all reviewer comments and, if requested, a written evaluation justifying the decision — is forwarded to the author. Where conditional publication is granted, outstanding issues identified by the editors must be addressed before the piece can proceed to publication.

The updated manuscript, containing all editorial comments and suggestions, is shared directly with the author via Google Docs. Authors are fully incorporated into the revision process and are encouraged to engage in open dialogue with their assigned editorial panel. They are expected to review each comment carefully, accept or adjust suggested edits, and clarify any points of disagreement. Revised manuscripts must be resubmitted within the timeline provided.

It is the responsibility of the editorial panel to evaluate, weighing the arguments of both reviewers and authors, whether outstanding issues have been adequately addressed. In cases of disagreement between reviewers and authors, editors may continue the discussion with the relevant reviewer before reaching a final determination.

Stage 5: Final Approval & Publication Preparation

Once the editorial panel is satisfied that revisions address all key concerns, uphold academic integrity, and meet UHURU's editorial standards, the submission receives final approval. The manuscript then moves to copyediting and layout, where it is prepared for publication in all relevant formats. Upon request, authors may receive a final proof of their article in press for review and approval before publication.

Editorial Principles

Fairness and Respect: All feedback provided by editors and reviewers must be constructive, clear, and respectful of the author's perspective, voice, and scholarly contribution.

Transparency: Authors receive all editorial comments, the rationale behind major recommendations, and meaningful opportunities to clarify or respond to suggested revisions throughout the process.

Confidentiality: Editors and reviewers maintain strict confidentiality regarding author identity (in accordance with the double-anonymous review model), internal deliberations, and all unpublished work.

Timeliness: Both editors and authors are expected to adhere to reasonable timelines at each stage of the review process, so that all submissions move forward efficiently and publications are delivered on schedule.