Technology and Asylum Procedures

Technology and Asylum Procedures

After the COVID-19 pandemic stopped many asylum procedures across Europe, fresh technologies are now reviving these systems. Out of lie recognition tools analyzed at the border to a system for verifying documents and transcribes selection interviews, a wide range of systems is being applied to asylum applications. This article is exploring how these solutions have reshaped the ways asylum procedures will be conducted. This reveals just how asylum seekers happen to be transformed into required hindered techno-users: They are asked to conform to a series of techno-bureaucratic steps and also to keep up with capricious tiny within criteria and deadlines. This kind of obstructs their particular capacity to work these devices and to pursue their right for security.

It also illustrates how these types of technologies are embedded in refugee governance: They help the ‘circuits of financial-humanitarianism’ that function through a flutter of dispersed technological requirements. These requirements increase asylum seekers’ socio-legal precarity by hindering them from getting at the channels of safeguard. It further argues that analyses of securitization and victimization should be coupled with an insight into the disciplinary mechanisms for these technologies, by which migrants will be turned into data-generating subjects who have are disciplined by their reliance on technology.

Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal know-how, the article states that these solutions have an inherent obstructiveness. They have a double result: although they aid to expedite the asylum method, they also produce it difficult just for refugees to navigate these types of systems. They can be positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes these people vulnerable to illegitimate decisions of non-governmental actors, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their instances. Moreover, that they pose new risks of’machine mistakes’ which may result in erroneous or discriminatory outcomes.

About the author

admin administrator