After the COVID-19 pandemic halted many asylum procedures around Europe, new technologies have become reviving these kinds of systems. Out of lie diagnosis tools analyzed at the line to a system for verifying documents and transcribes selection interviews, a wide range of technologies is being applied to asylum applications. This article explores just how these technology have reshaped the ways asylum procedures happen to be conducted. It reveals just how asylum seekers happen to be transformed into forced hindered techno-users: They are asked to conform to a series of techno-bureaucratic steps and also to keep up with capricious tiny within criteria and deadlines. This obstructs the capacity to get around these systems and to pursue their right for protection.
It also shows how these kinds of technologies happen to be embedded in refugee governance: They facilitate 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 getting at the channels of protection. It www.ascella-llc.com/generated-post/ further argues that examines of securitization and victimization should be coupled with an insight into the disciplinary mechanisms of the technologies, by which migrants are turned into data-generating subjects who have are disciplined by their reliance on technology.
Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal expertise, the article states that these technology have an natural obstructiveness. They have a double impact: when they assist with expedite the asylum procedure, they also make it difficult designed for refugees to navigate these types of systems. They are simply positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes them vulnerable to bogus decisions made by non-governmental actors, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their instances. Moreover, they pose fresh risks of’machine mistakes’ which may result in erroneous or discriminatory outcomes.