Background and Aim of Study: The present study discusses the necessity and sufficiency of the criteria of the Scopus database for quality assurance of scientific publications, as well as the reviewer's role in the journal evaluation process. The paper analyses the process by which Scopus reviewers evaluate IJSA to ensure the Journal meets the stated criteria for indexing in Scopus. The aim of the study: to investigate the objectivity of the Scopus journal evaluation - to carry out a comparative analysis of the results of the Scopus reviewer evaluation with the real qualitative and quantitative criteria of a particular journal, and to compare them with the criteria of periodicals already indexed in Scopus. Material and Methods: Qualitative and quantitative IJSA analysis methods based on five categories and fourteen selection criteria from Scopus were used. A comparative analysis of scientific periodicals indexed in Scopus has been conducted. We used open databases to study the current state of the research problem: Scopus website, journals websites, journal articles, and social media. Results: A case study of a particular journal, IJSA, was used to describe the whole process of preparing, submitting, evaluating, and appealing the evaluation of the Journal in the Scopus database. A journal may indeed meet high criteria for assessing scientific publications, including those declared by Scopus. However, this does not guarantee its indexing in this database because there is a human factor – a Content Selection and Advisory Board (CSAB) reviewer – who has the power to subjectively evaluate the Journal and reject it on formal grounds or his / her misjudgment. Conclusions: The decision of the CSAB reviewer is more significant for the inclusion of a journal in Scopus than the fulfilment of the quality criteria of the evaluated Journal. This is illustrated by the fact that some journals cannot be indexed or are excluded from indexing in Scopus, while other journals of lesser quality have been indexed in this database for many years. Today's main problems in scientific periodicals are discussed (paper mills, predatory journals, citation cartels, buying an author's place in a commissioned paper, changing journal ownership, fraudulent websites, etc.). A number of criteria for assessing the quality of journals need to be reviewed, and a balance must be struck between their necessity and sufficiency. This eliminates any possible (or forced) manipulation of journals to meet Scopus indexing criteria.