After the COVID-19 pandemic stopped many asylum procedures around Europe, new technologies are actually reviving these kinds of systems. Out of lie recognition tools examined at the line to a system for validating documents and transcribes interviews, a wide range of solutions is being utilised in asylum applications. This article is exploring how these technology have reshaped the ways asylum procedures are conducted. That reveals how asylum seekers happen to 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 unpredictable tiny within criteria and deadlines. This kind of obstructs all their capacity to get around these systems and to go after their right for safeguards.
It also demonstrates how these kinds of technologies are embedded in refugee governance: They help the ‘circuits of financial-humanitarianism’ that function through a whirlwind of dispersed technological requirements. These requirements increase asylum seekers’ socio-legal precarity by simply hindering these people from opening the stations of proper protection. It further states that analyses of securitization and victimization should be put together with an insight in to the disciplinary mechanisms of them technologies, through which migrants are turned into data-generating subjects whom are disciplined by their reliability on technology.
Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal expertise, 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 generate it difficult for the purpose of refugees to navigate these types of systems. They can be positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes all of them vulnerable to bogus decisions created by non-governmental actors, and www.ascella-llc.com/ ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their situations. Moreover, they pose new risks of’machine mistakes’ which may result in incorrect or discriminatory outcomes.