After the COVID-19 pandemic halted many asylum procedures across Europe, fresh technologies are reviving these kinds of systems. By lie detection tools examined at the boundary to a program for validating documents and transcribes interviews, a wide range of technology is being applied to asylum applications. This article is exploring just how these solutions have reshaped the ways asylum procedures will be conducted. It reveals how asylum seekers are transformed into compelled hindered techno-users: They are asked to adhere to a series of techno-bureaucratic steps and also to keep up with capricious tiny changes in criteria and deadlines. This obstructs their capacity to find their way these systems and to pursue their legal right for coverage.
It also shows how these kinds of technologies happen to be embedded in refugee governance: They assist in 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 being able to view the stations of safeguard. It further argues that examines of securitization and victimization should be coupled with an insight in the disciplinary www.ascella-llc.com/the-counseling-services-offers-free-confidential-counseling-services-to-enrolled-students mechanisms of them technologies, in which migrants are turned into data-generating subjects exactly who are self-disciplined by their dependence on technology.
Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal understanding, the article argues that these systems have an inherent obstructiveness. There is a double result: even though they assist with expedite the asylum method, they also make it difficult with regards to refugees to navigate these kinds of systems. They are really positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes them vulnerable to illegitimate decisions manufactured by non-governmental stars, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their circumstances. Moreover, they pose fresh risks of’machine mistakes’ which may result in erroneous or discriminatory outcomes.