Lock Annual Review when process unpublished

Here's a clearer and more structured version of your feedback:

Process reviews frequently result in feedback and required updates to the process documentation. To better align with our governance framework, the system should prevent a Process Owner from approving and completing a review on an unpublished version when edits are still in progress. The version being approved should represent the final, accurate version of the process. It would also be beneficial if the system could be configured to align with our review framework and enforce the correct review responsibilities. We continue to encounter situations where the Subject Matter Expert completes the review, even though our framework requires the Process Owner to provide the final approval. Another ongoing challenge is that Process Owners sometimes approve a process while edits are still outstanding. For example, they may submit review feedback, the process is unpublished for updates, and then they approve the process before the changes are completed. In some cases, they even document "Approved with edits being completed." This creates a compliance gap because the approved version is not the finalized version. These behaviors do not align with our governance framework and continue to create recurring audit and process management issues. System controls that enforce review roles, prevent premature approvals, and require all edits to be completed before approval would help ensure compliance and improve process integrity.