We invite early career researchers from diverse disciplines to submit contributions for a workshop which seeks to critically examine neutrality in legal scholarship.

In legal scholarship, neutrality is frequently invoked as a defining characteristic of academic rigor, objectivity, and ‘excellence’. Legal scholars are often expected – and sometimes even pressured – to avoid taking explicit positions in politically or socially sensitive debates, presenting their work as detached from values and grounded in ‘objective reasoning’. In this sense, neutrality has come to function not only as a methodological stance but also as a benchmark for assessing scholarly quality.

Recent developments underline the urgency of critically revisiting this assumption. In various jurisdictions, most prominently in the United States, governmental and academic institutions are increasingly promoting ‘value-free’ or ‘non-political’ research as a condition for academic legitimacy. What is particularly striking is how these restrictions are often justified through the language of neutrality itself. Yet, critics have pointed out that this framing risks concealing the ways in which neutrality may reinforce existing hierarchies and privileged epistemologies, often grounded in Eurocentric, patriarchal, or state-centred assumptions. These dynamics may be further reinforced in publishing practices, peer review processes, and research funding decisions, where preferences for ‘neutral’ scholarship can also decisively reduce engagement with critical research.

Legal scholarship becomes more than a case study here: As other disciplines perceive law as a practice and as a discipline that is detached from politics, law indirectly informs other disciplines on how to perform ‘neutral’ research.

Against this backdrop, we invite early career researchers to critically examine neutrality as a construct, a methodological stance, and/or a disciplinary instrument in legal scholarship and reflect on the following general themes: 

1. The Conceptual and Historical Foundations of Neutrality in Legal Scholarship

Understanding how neutrality became embedded as a marker of quality is essential to critically assessing its current role. What is the intellectual genealogy of neutrality in legal scholarship? Is it a narrative or a methodological tool? How has neutrality been linked to objectivity, truth, and scientific rigor? Which developments contributed to its elevation as a benchmark of scholarly quality?

2. Sociopolitical Dimensions of Neutrality in Legal Research

Calls for neutrality in academic discourse can be seen as deeply entangled with broader political and social contexts and as attempts to delineate acceptable positions and constrain critique. How does neutrality affect scholarly engagement with politically sensitive issues? In what ways does neutrality function as a mechanism of exclusion within legal academia? How do (current) sociopolitical developments influence what is considered ‘neutral’ scholarship?

3. Implications of Neutrality on Academic Infrastructure

Neutrality has been observed to have an impact on various aspects of academic infrastructure, thereby shaping research agendas and knowledge production and dissemination. How does neutrality influence decisions in peer review, editorial selection, and funding institutions’ priorities? In what ways do funding bodies incorporate (explicitly or implicitly) expectations of neutrality into evaluation criteria? How does the academic infrastructure discourage critical scholarship?

4. Methodological Implications of Neutrality

The prioritisation of neutrality raises methodological questions. While neutrality is often associated with minimizing bias, it also obscures the role of positionality in knowledge production and neglects the significance of reflexivity and critical engagement in the study of international law. Who defines neutrality, and whose perspectives are excluded in this process? What are the methodological implications of valuing neutrality over reflexivity in legal scholarship? Which epistemic costs does neutrality carry? How does the marginalization of critical methodologies and the reproduction of epistemic injustices impact legal research and teaching?

5. Is Neutrality a Reliable Criterion of Academic Rigor?

Which are the normative and ethical dimensions of neutrality in legal scholarship? Is neutrality in any way desirable or does it always function as a mechanism of depoliticization that obscures law’s inherently normative character? Would an explicit engagement with particular values offer a more transparent and responsible foundation for assessing scholarly excellence? Which criteria could replace neutrality as a marker of academic quality?

Workshop & Practicalities

The workshop will take place at Ruhr University Bochum on 9-10 December 2026. The workshop is designed for early career researchers (i.e. non-tenured academics) from various disciplines (law, philosophy, sociology, politics, and science studies). We are pleased to announce that Professor Jean D’Aspremont (Sciences Po), Professor Stewart Manley (Maynooth University), Professor Vasuki Nesiah (NYU), and Professor Mando Rachovitsa (University of Nottingham) will serve as discussants. After the workshop, we envisage to publish the papers in a special issue of a peer-reviewed open-access journal. We also invite speakers to contribute to a blog symposium on Völkerrechtsblog before the workshop.

This workshop is generously funded by the Volkswagen Foundations under its ‘Researching Research: Summer Schools and Workshops’ program. We anticipate to cover all travel and accommodation expenses.

Submission

Please send your abstract (max 500 words) and a 2-page CV to the co-chairs of the workshop, Sissy Katsoni(Spyridoula.Katsoni@ruhr-uni-bochum.de) and Julian Hettihewa (jhettih2@uni-bonn.de), mentioning “Call for Papers: The Impact of Neutrality on Research and Knowledge Production in Legal Scholarship” in the subject line. Please also mention whether you wish to participate in the blogpost symposium to be held on Völkerrechtsblog before the workshop and indicate from where you intend to travel to Bochum. Successful authors are required to submit a working paper (6,000 – 10,000 words) before the workshop.

Timeline

Deadline for abstracts: 30 June 2026

Notification of successful authors: 15 July 2026

Deadline for blogposts: 15 October 2026

Deadline for working papers: 20 November 2026

Völkerrechtsblog symposium: 30 November 2026

Workshop: 9-10 December 2026 (Ruhr-University Bochum)