After the COVID-19 pandemic stopped many asylum procedures throughout Europe, fresh technologies have become reviving these types of systems. By lie detection tools examined at the border to a system for validating documents and transcribes selection interviews, a wide range of technology is being utilised in asylum applications. This article is exploring just how these systems have reshaped the ways asylum procedures will be conducted. That reveals how asylum seekers are transformed into required hindered techno-users: They are asked to comply with a series www.ascella-llc.com/asylum-procedure-advice of techno-bureaucratic steps and keep up with capricious tiny within criteria and deadlines. This kind of obstructs their particular capacity to steer these systems and to go after their legal right for safeguards.
It also illustrates how these kinds of technologies will be embedded in refugee governance: They help the ‘circuits of financial-humanitarianism’ that function through a whirlwind of distributed technological requirements. These requirements increase asylum seekers’ socio-legal precarity by simply hindering these people from accessing the stations of safeguards. It further argues that examines of securitization and victimization should be combined with an insight into the disciplinary mechanisms of the technologies, in which migrants will be turned into data-generating subjects whom are self-disciplined by their reliance on technology.
Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal expertise, the article states that these solutions have an inherent obstructiveness. They have a double effect: whilst they help to expedite the asylum method, they also generate it difficult just for refugees to navigate these types of systems. They may be positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes them vulnerable to bogus decisions created by non-governmental stars, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their situations. Moreover, they pose fresh risks of’machine mistakes’ that may result in incorrect or discriminatory outcomes.