4 de diciembre de 2023

Technology and Asylum Procedures

After the COVID-19 pandemic stopped many asylum procedures around Europe, fresh technologies have become reviving these kinds of systems. Out of lie diagnosis tools examined at the boundary to a system for verifying documents and transcribes interviews, a wide range of technologies is being applied to asylum applications. This article explores www.ascella-llc.com/generated-post-2 how these technologies have reshaped the ways asylum procedures will be conducted. It reveals just how asylum seekers are transformed into forced hindered techno-users: They are asked to abide by a series of techno-bureaucratic steps and keep up with capricious tiny changes in criteria and deadlines. This kind of obstructs the capacity to steer these systems and to pursue their legal right for security.

It also shows how these technologies happen to be embedded in refugee governance: They aid the ‘circuits of financial-humanitarianism’ that function through a whirlwind of dispersed technological requirements. These requirements increase asylum seekers’ socio-legal precarity by hindering them from interacting with the stations of protection. It further argues that studies of securitization and victimization should be combined with an insight in the disciplinary mechanisms of technologies, through which migrants happen to be turned into data-generating subjects who all are self-disciplined by their reliance on technology.

Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal knowledge, the article states that these technology have an inherent obstructiveness. They have a double result: whilst they help to expedite the asylum process, they also help to make it difficult for the purpose of refugees to navigate these systems. They may be positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes these people vulnerable to illegitimate decisions manufactured by non-governmental stars, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their instances. Moreover, they pose fresh risks of’machine mistakes’ which may result in inaccurate or discriminatory outcomes.