Manuscripts submitted to E-Justice will undergo an initial review by the Editors to ensure they meet the basic requirements and submission guidelines of E-Justice. Manuscripts that comply with the journal's style and policy will proceed to a peer review. This journal employs a double-blind peer review process, involving multiple experts in the relevant legal fields. The final decision on manuscript acceptance is made by the Editors based on the reviewers' feedback. Each manuscript is evaluated by at least two reviewers, selected based on their expertise and previous experience in manuscript review.

E-Justice utilizes standardized review forms to ensure consistent evaluation criteria are applied by at least two reviewers. The editorial board makes the final decision based on the reviewers' comments and recommendations. Reviewers assess manuscripts for originality, clarity of presentation, contribution to the legal sector, and community empowerment, using E-Justice Form. E-Justice offers four types of decisions:

1. Accepted without revision
2. Accepted with Minor Revisions (authors are given a specified time to revise)
3. Accepted with Major Revisions (authors are given a specified time to revise)
4. Declined (typically due to being outside the journal's scope, significant technical issues, or lack of clarity in presentation).