After the COVID-19 pandemic stopped many asylum procedures around Europe, new technologies are reviving these types of systems. Coming from lie detection tools tested at the edge to a program for confirming documents and transcribes selection interviews, a wide range of systems is being included in asylum applications. This article is exploring just how these solutions have reshaped the ways asylum procedures are conducted. That reveals how asylum seekers will be transformed into obligated hindered techno-users: They are asked to adhere to a series of techno-bureaucratic steps and also to keep up with unforeseen tiny changes in criteria and deadlines. This obstructs all their capacity to find their way these devices and to pursue their right for coverage.

It also demonstrates how these types of technologies happen to be 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 hindering all of them from interacting with the programs of safety. It www.ascella-llc.com/asylum-consultation/ further states that analyses of securitization and victimization should be combined with an insight into the disciplinary mechanisms worth mentioning technologies, by which migrants will be turned into data-generating subjects who are disciplined by their dependence on technology.

Drawing on Foucault’s notion of power/knowledge and comarcal know-how, the article argues that these systems have an inherent obstructiveness. They have a double result: although they aid to expedite the asylum method, they also make it difficult meant for refugees to navigate these kinds of systems. They are positioned in a ‘knowledge deficit’ that makes them vulnerable to bogus decisions made by non-governmental celebrities, and ill-informed and unreliable narratives about their circumstances. Moreover, they will pose new risks of’machine mistakes’ which may result in inaccurate or discriminatory outcomes.