Systems and Asylum Procedures

After the COVID-19 pandemic halted many asylum procedures around Europe, fresh technologies are reviving these kinds of systems. Out of lie recognition tools tested at the boundary to a system for validating documents and transcribes selection interviews, a wide range of systems is being utilized in asylum applications. This article is exploring how these technologies have reshaped the ways asylum procedures are conducted. This reveals how asylum seekers happen to be transformed into obligated hindered techno-users: They are asked to adhere to a series of techno-bureaucratic steps and keep up with unpredictable tiny within criteria and deadlines. This obstructs all their capacity to work these systems and to follow their legal right for security.

It also displays how these types of technologies happen to be embedded in refugee governance: They assist in the ‘circuits of financial-humanitarianism’ that function through a flutter of dispersed technological requirements. These requirements increase asylum seekers’ socio-legal precarity by simply hindering them from being able to view the stations of safety. It www.ascella-llc.com/portals-of-the-board-of-directors-for-advising-migrant-workers further states that examines of securitization and victimization should be along with an insight in to the disciplinary mechanisms of those technologies, through which migrants are turned into data-generating subjects who are disciplined by their dependence on technology.

Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal know-how, the article argues that these technology have an natural obstructiveness. They have a double effect: while they aid to expedite the asylum procedure, they also help to make it difficult just for refugees to navigate these types of systems. They are positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes all of them vulnerable to illegitimate decisions made by non-governmental celebrities, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their instances. Moreover, they will pose new risks of’machine mistakes’ that may result in incorrect or discriminatory outcomes.