Technologies and Asylum Procedures

After the COVID-19 pandemic halted many asylum procedures throughout Europe, new technologies are now reviving these kinds of systems. Via lie recognition tools tested at the border to a system for confirming documents and transcribes interviews, a wide range of technology is being employed in asylum applications. This article is exploring how these systems have reshaped the ways asylum procedures happen to be conducted. That reveals just how asylum seekers will be transformed into forced hindered techno-users: They are asked to comply with a series of techno-bureaucratic steps and to keep up with capricious tiny within criteria and deadlines. This kind of obstructs their very own capacity to steer these devices and to follow their legal right for coverage.

It also demonstrates how these types of technologies happen to be embedded in refugee governance: They assist in the ‘circuits of financial-humanitarianism’ that function through a whirlwind of spread technological requirements. These requirements increase asylum seekers’ socio-legal precarity by hindering all of them from accessing the stations of coverage. It further states that studies of securitization and victimization should be combined with an insight in to the disciplinary www.ascella-llc.com/asylum-procedure-advice mechanisms of the technologies, through which migrants are turned into data-generating subjects just who are regimented by their reliability on technology.

Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal knowledge, the article argues that these systems have an natural obstructiveness. They have a double impact: although they assist with expedite the asylum process, they also make it difficult pertaining to refugees to navigate these types of systems. They are simply positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes them vulnerable to illegitimate decisions of non-governmental actors, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their conditions. Moreover, they will pose new risks of’machine mistakes’ which may result in incorrect or discriminatory outcomes.