Publishing & Research in International Criminal Justice — A Practical 2025 Guide to JICJ & International Justice Scholarship "Comprehensive, guide for law students and practitioners on the Journal of International Criminal Justice (JICJ) and international justice scholarship: recent developments, how to craft publishable work, submission workflow, cover-letter templates, pitfalls, examples and clickable sources (2023–2025)."

JICJ / International Justice How to Research, Write & Publish — Practical Guide (2025)

Target audience: law students, junior academics, defence/prosecution practitioners. Compiled from Oxford Academic, ICC, ICJ, publisher guidance, COPE, Sherpa/Jisc, and recent scholarship (2023–2025).

This long-form guide synthesises up-to-date, authoritative material about the Journal of International Criminal Justice (JICJ) and international justice scholarship. It provides a practical **step-by-step** blueprint — from choosing a publishable question, drafting a JICJ style article, submitting and responding to reviewers — to navigating ethics, permissions and open-access options. Ready-made templates, examples, and clickable footnotes are included.

1. What is JICJ and why publish there?

The Journal of International Criminal Justice (JICJ) is an Oxford University Press peer-reviewed journal focused on criminal law at the international level: ICC practice, ad hoc tribunals, national prosecutions of international crimes, doctrinal debates, and cross-disciplinary issues (criminology, penal philosophy). It is widely read by judges, prosecutors, defence counsel, academics and policy makers — making it a high-impact place to influence practice and policy. 0

Recent JICJ special issues and articles signal front-line topics: ecocide/environmental crimes, corporate liability, misinformation and digital evidence, and critical reviews of ICL institutions. If your work intersects these themes, JICJ is especially receptive. 1

2. Recent developments you must know (2023–2025)

ICJ advisory opinion on climate (23 July 2025): the ICJ’s advisory opinion on states’ obligations in respect of climate change is reshaping arguments about state duties, intergenerational equity, and environmental protection in both domestic and international fora. This opinion will be cited across international criminal law scholarship where environmental harm or state obligations are discussed. 2
ICC Office of the Prosecutor — environmental crimes consultation: the ICC OTP launched public consultations and policy proposals on environmental crimes (late-2023 → 2024), keeping “ecocide” and accountability for large-scale environmental harm on the agenda for prosecutors and scholars. Expect more doctrinal pieces and practice proposals. 3
National universal-jurisdiction prosecutions: high-profile national cases (e.g., Ousman Sonko convicted in Switzerland, May 2024) demonstrate growing use of domestic courts to prosecute international crimes and provide comparative materials for JICJ submissions. 4
Institutional critique & reform debates: JICJ has hosted reflective symposia on the future of ICL, including critiques and reform proposals — useful for policy-oriented submissions. 5

3. What do editors & reviewers at JICJ look for?

Editors evaluate submissions on three practical axes: (A) originality & contribution (what new legal or empirical insight?), (B) authoritativeness (primary sources, jurisprudence, accurate citations), and (C) practical value (will judges, prosecutors, or policy makers use this?). Present the utility early in the introduction (one short paragraph: “why this matters to practice”). 6

Also remember: JICJ follows OUP editorial norms — clear structure, professional English, and correct referencing (JICJ provides a style sheet—obtainable from the editorial assistant). Failure to follow the style sheet is an easy, avoidable reason for a desk rejection. 7

4. A 6-step, publishable research plan (how to build a JICJ-worthy paper)

Choose a tightly framed question: pick a discrete doctrinal or empirical problem (e.g., “Does the Rome Statute’s Article 30 support recklessness for corporate ecocide?”). Narrow beats broad. Use recent events (e.g., ICJ climate AO, ICC OTP consultations) as motivators. 8
Map primary authorities: collect treaty texts (Rome Statute, VCLT), relevant ICC cases, ICJ decisions, national judgments (e.g., Sonko), and statute/regulatory sources. Place these before most secondary materials — judges and practitioners value primary law first. 9

Design method & evidence: doctrinal analysis, comparative case study, or empirical (coding cases, measuring prosecutorial patterns). If empirical, pre-register your dataset, explain coding, and discuss limits. Editors prize transparency. 10
Outline a structure & roadmap: (1) Intro—problem & why practice cares; (2) doctrinal/background; (3) analysis/methods; (4) counter-arguments; (5) practical rules/recommendations; (6) conclusion. Keep the intro crisp (≤1,000 words). 11
Write with discipline: short paragraphs, clear headings, early legal rule statement, and a short “Practical implications” box for judges/prosecutors. Footnote primary sources with paragraph-pinpoint citations. 12
Self-audit before submission: plagiarism check, permissions for reproduced material, confirm anonymisation if needed, create title page with affiliations and ORCID, prepare separate high-res figure files. Publishers expect this. 13

5. Submission — exact steps & practical checklist

JICJ uses OUP’s online submission workflows (ScholarOne/Editorial Manager). The practical steps:

Create an account at OUP Author Centre; complete affiliation & ORCID fields. 14
Upload files: (A) Title page (unblinded), (B) anonymised manuscript (if double blind), (C) abstract & keywords, (D) separate figures/tables, (E) permissions & statements (funding, conflicts). 15
Answer submission form questions (funding, COI, prior publication). Declare the manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere. 16
Submit & monitor: automated acknowledgement arrives. Typical timelines for OUP journals vary; desk checks can take 1–4 weeks; full peer review 8–16 weeks (variable). If delayed, send courteous editorial inquiry after ~12 weeks. 17

6. Cover letter & suggested reviewers (practical templates)

Editors read the cover letter first — keep it short and precise: state the problem, thesis, method, contribution and practical implications. Below is a copy-paste template you may adapt:

[Date]

Editor-in-Chief
Journal of International Criminal Justice
Oxford University Press

Dear Professor [Last name] / Editors,

Please consider my manuscript titled: “[Full Title]” (Article / Essay). Word count incl. footnotes: [#].

Summary (1 sentence): [Problem + thesis].
Contribution (3 bullets): 
• [Doctrinal or empirical contribution]
• [Comparative or jurisprudential insight]
• [Practical implication for judges/prosecutors]

I confirm the manuscript is original and not under review elsewhere. All authors approve submission. Funding/conflicts: [list or none].

Suggested reviewers (optional):
1) Name, affiliation, email
2) Name, affiliation, email

Sincerely,
[Name, affiliation, ORCID, email]

Source guidance for cover letters and suggested-reviewer practice comes from leading publisher guidelines (Elsevier, Springer, Wiley) and OUP submission help. Pick suggested reviewers who are not close collaborators and who can provide an impartial read. 18

7. Responding to reviewers — micro-template & strategy

When reviewers submit reports, respond with a polite, point-by-point table. Always: (A) thank reviewers, (B) reproduce each comment, (C) state your change (with manuscript location), or (D) explain respectfully why you did not adopt a suggestion. Keep tone professional and evidence-based. Trusted templates are available from Wiley, Editage and PMC guidance. 19

Response to reviewers — Example snippet:

Reviewer 1, Comment 2:
"The discussion of Article 30 lacks clarity about the knowledge threshold."

Author response:
We thank the reviewer. We have rewritten paras. 45–52 to clarify: (a) Article 30(2)(b) requires subjective knowledge of the factual circumstances or conscious awareness of the risk; (b) applied to corporate decision-making, we propose a 'collective knowledge' model (see p.12 para 3). Changes: Manuscript pp.11–13, tracked-changes file attached.

8. Permissions, OA/APC & copyright — what to prepare

If your article reproduces figures, tables, statutory extracts beyond short quotations, secure permissions early. OUP handles permissions via their permissions department, but editors expect authors to have sought or at least initiated requests pre-submission. For open access, OUP offers hybrid options; APCs and waivers vary (check Sherpa/Jisc and OUP open access pages for exact terms and eligibility). EIFL and other institutional agreements may provide APC support or waivers. 20

9. Common reasons for rejection & how to avoid them

Scope mismatch: read recent JICJ issues before submitting; tailor the introduction to show fit.
Poor engagement with primary law: courts and statutes first; secondary literature supports, not replaces. 22
Weak methodology: if empirical, explain data and limits; if comparative, justify case selection. Publisher guidance explains these rejection drivers. 23
Formatting & ethics failures: missing permissions, plagiarism, poor citation formatting. Use COPE guidance and run a self-plagiarism check pre-submission. 24

10. Two practical examples / short anecdotes (how scholarship met practice)

Example A — National prosecution (Sonko) as comparative material

Swiss conviction of former Gambian interior minister Ousman Sonko (2024) provided immediate comparative law material for articles on universal jurisdiction, evidence and victim reparation. Practitioners publishing on universal jurisdiction used judicial reasoning and evidentiary challenges from Sonko’s trial to propose reforms and model legislative language. Use such high-profile national prosecutions as empirical anchors in JICJ submissions. 25

Example B — ICJ climate advisory opinion & scholarly ripple

The ICJ’s Advisory Opinion (23 July 2025) on state obligations in respect of climate change has become an immediate citation frontier in pieces about environmental harm and international criminal law — scholars argue it bolsters normative arguments for prosecutorial attention to ecocide, and it informs interpretive approaches to treaty obligations invoked in ICL contexts. Citing the AO and linking it to OTP consults makes articles timely and practice-relevant. 26

11. Final checklist — copy & use before you click SUBMIT

✔ Title & abstract (concrete contribution, 150–250 words).
✔ Title page with ORCID, affiliations & contact info.
✔ Manuscript formatted to JICJ style sheet; obedient footnote and case citation form. 27
✔ Permissions for third-party material, data/code availability statement (if empirical).
✔ Cover letter tailored to JICJ (use template above).
✔ Self-plagiarism & similarity check; co-author signoffs documented.
✔ Backup files, high-res figures, tracked-change revised file (if invited to revise).

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE