Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 872 items :

  • "Credibility" x
Clear All

Janik Bastien Charlebois, Vincent Guillot SUMMARY Since its establishment in the early 1990s the intersex movement has been at- tempting to enforce the respect for intersex children’s human right to physical integrity and self-determination, as well as the non-pathologization of intersex- uality. However, this has met with strong resistance from the medical commu- nity which prefers to reject criticism as subjective and unfounded. Credibility is a central issue in this debate, but it is rarely openly addressed. If the medical profession puts so much store in

fulfil the require- ments for refugee status, and whether they believe the applicants' state- ments are credible.2 Applicants must fulfil both preconditions before receiv- ing asylum. Although Gabriel works in the SEM “to help people”, for him it is okay that most applicants get rejected. This has to do with his understanding of fairness, a core issue in professional decision-making. Thus, later in the conversation quoted above, he went on to say that it was the decision-makers' duty to meticulously examine the credibility of each case, because otherwise

Asylum Procedure in Border Detention 69 shows that these two issues at stake – i.e. veracity and bodily peril – are inextricably linked in the framework of adjudication, as Ahmed Masri's case illustrates. We can thus identify categories that inform the French definition of asylum. Without entering, for the moment, into judgments of narrative truth and applicant credibility, we recognize four exclusionary arguments that delimit the framework of asylum in France – which will be discussed in turn in the subsequent sections. In the administrative jargon of the border

Wissenschaftliche Arbeit zwischen Berufshabitus und sozialer Abhängigkeit
Ethos and Ethics in Migration Administrations
On the Limits of Criticism and the Limits of its Critics

Abstract

In the context of the ever-increasing political problematization of migration in Europe, agencies charged with migrant administration create diverse categories of difference to distinguish between the »deserving migrant« and the illegal one: They assess the detainability or the credibility of asylum seekers, the danger posed by Islamic organizations, and make situational decisions that determine whether migration or labour law applies to individual agricultural workers. In this book, each chapter analyses how organizational interpretations of the common good shape bureaucratic practices. Together, these ethnographic analyses reveal how migration policies in different European countries take shape in administrative practice.

OPEN ACCESS

Abstract

In the context of the ever-increasing political problematization of migration in Europe, agencies charged with migrant administration create diverse categories of difference to distinguish between the »deserving migrant« and the illegal one: They assess the detainability or the credibility of asylum seekers, the danger posed by Islamic organizations, and make situational decisions that determine whether migration or labour law applies to individual agricultural workers. In this book, each chapter analyses how organizational interpretations of the common good shape bureaucratic practices. Together, these ethnographic analyses reveal how migration policies in different European countries take shape in administrative practice.

Abstract

In the context of the ever-increasing political problematization of migration in Europe, agencies charged with migrant administration create diverse categories of difference to distinguish between the »deserving migrant« and the illegal one: They assess the detainability or the credibility of asylum seekers, the danger posed by Islamic organizations, and make situational decisions that determine whether migration or labour law applies to individual agricultural workers. In this book, each chapter analyses how organizational interpretations of the common good shape bureaucratic practices. Together, these ethnographic analyses reveal how migration policies in different European countries take shape in administrative practice.

OPEN ACCESS

Abstract

In the context of the ever-increasing political problematization of migration in Europe, agencies charged with migrant administration create diverse categories of difference to distinguish between the »deserving migrant« and the illegal one: They assess the detainability or the credibility of asylum seekers, the danger posed by Islamic organizations, and make situational decisions that determine whether migration or labour law applies to individual agricultural workers. In this book, each chapter analyses how organizational interpretations of the common good shape bureaucratic practices. Together, these ethnographic analyses reveal how migration policies in different European countries take shape in administrative practice.