Technology and Asylum Procedures

After the COVID-19 pandemic stopped many asylum procedures throughout Europe, new technologies have become reviving these systems. Right from lie diagnosis tools tested at the edge to a system for validating documents and transcribes selection interviews, a wide range of solutions is being utilized in asylum applications. This article is exploring just how these technologies have reshaped the ways asylum procedures happen to be conducted. This reveals just how asylum seekers are transformed into obligated hindered techno-users: They are asked to adhere to a series of techno-bureaucratic steps and also to keep up with capricious tiny within criteria and deadlines. This kind of obstructs their capacity to run these devices and to follow their right for safeguard.

It also displays how these kinds of technologies are embedded in refugee governance: They help the ‘circuits of financial-humanitarianism’ that function through a flutter of distributed technological requirements. These requirements increase asylum seekers’ socio-legal precarity by simply hindering these people from opening the programs of cover. It further states that studies of securitization and victimization should be coupled with an insight in the disciplinary www.ascella-llc.com/generated-post-2 mechanisms of those technologies, through which migrants are turned into data-generating subjects who all are regimented by their reliability on technology.

Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal expertise, the article states that these systems have an inherent obstructiveness. There is a double result: although they help to expedite the asylum procedure, they also generate it difficult meant for refugees to navigate these systems. They can be positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes all of them vulnerable to illegitimate decisions of non-governmental stars, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their cases. Moreover, they pose new risks of’machine mistakes’ which may result in incorrect or discriminatory outcomes.