After the COVID-19 pandemic halted many asylum procedures throughout Europe, new technologies are reviving these types of systems. From lie recognition tools analyzed at the line to a system for confirming documents and transcribes interviews, a wide range of systems is being made use of in asylum applications. This article explores just how these technology have reshaped the ways asylum procedures are conducted. That reveals just how asylum seekers will be transformed into compelled hindered techno-users: They are asked to adhere to a series of techno-bureaucratic steps and also to keep up with unforeseen tiny within criteria and deadlines. This kind of obstructs their capacity to browse these systems and to go after their legal right for cover.
It also shows how these technologies are embedded in refugee governance: They aid 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 all of them from opening the programs of safety. It further states that studies of securitization and victimization should be combined with an insight into the disciplinary mechanisms for these technologies, by which migrants will be turned into data-generating subjects so, who 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. There is a double effect: www.ascella-llc.com/the-counseling-services-offers-free-confidential-counseling-services-to-enrolled-students/ even though they help to expedite the asylum method, they also help to make it difficult to get refugees to navigate these kinds of systems. They can be positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes them vulnerable to illegitimate decisions of non-governmental stars, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their conditions. Moreover, they pose fresh risks of’machine mistakes’ that may result in erroneous or discriminatory outcomes.