Communication in the Asylum Courts: Limits of Inquiry
Communication in the Asylum Courts: Limits of Inquiry

Summary/Abstract: This text offers an inquiry into communication amongst people present at asylum court public hearings: judges, representatives of the Immigration Bureau, legal representatives, asylum applicants, interpreters, witnesses, public. I focus on how the performance of court attendees is determined by the setting in time and space, by the bureaucratic methods of inquiry and by institutional and personal notions of justice. Communication in the courtroom is presented as a manifold process of interpretation to and from: diverse cultures, diverse languages, diverse social statuses, diverse legal positions. I argue that the current ways of inquiry unnecessarily limit both sides: investigators and asylum applicants. Cross-examination provides insufficient information to the people in charge of the lives of asylum applicants. Moreover the format of the questions that is derived purely from legal justifications is partial and might be interculturally insensitive. Definitions of applicants’ trustworthiness and verification of evidence also vary significantly amongst asylum applicants, lawyers and social scientists. In order to understand such processes of legitimacy, participant observation and ethnographic interviews with different court attendees were made between the years 2006 and 2008 at the appeals courts, the Immigration Bureau and in refugee camps in Slovakia.

• Details
• Contents