Systems and Asylum Procedures

After the COVID-19 pandemic stopped many asylum procedures around Europe, fresh technologies are reviving these types of systems. By lie detection tools analyzed at the border to a system for verifying documents and transcribes selection interviews, a wide range of technology is being used in asylum applications. This article explores how these technology have reshaped the ways asylum procedures happen to be conducted. It reveals just how asylum seekers will be transformed into obligated hindered techno-users: They are asked to conform to a series of techno-bureaucratic steps and also to keep up with unstable tiny changes in criteria and deadlines. This obstructs the capacity to work these systems and to follow their legal right for security.

It also shows how these kinds of technologies will be embedded in refugee governance: They help in the ‘circuits of financial-humanitarianism’ that function through a flutter of distributed technological requirements. These requirements increase asylum seekers’ socio-legal precarity simply by hindering them from opening the programs of proper protection. It further argues that analyses of securitization and victimization should be coupled with an insight in the disciplinary mechanisms these technologies, through which migrants will be turned into data-generating subjects so, who are self-disciplined by their reliance on technology.

Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal expertise, the article states that these technology have an natural obstructiveness. There is a double impact: although they assist to expedite the asylum process, they also make it difficult intended for refugees to navigate these systems. They are really positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes all of them vulnerable to illegitimate decisions manufactured by non-governmental celebrities, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their instances. Moreover, they will pose fresh risks of’machine mistakes’ that may result in incorrect or discriminatory outcomes.