Where I come from and how I got here
Asylum cases are characterized by a general lack of documental evidence to support the applicant’s identity, origin, and persecution story. As such, in deciding on a claim, government officials typically have to rely on the applicant’s own testimony and general information about the country of origin. PhD thesis by Tanja van Veldhuizen.
Assessing credibility in asylum cases
The testimony is central to the asylum procedure, and its credibility is the key determinant for granting or rejecting asylum. Optimizing the accuracy of credibility assessments is therefore indispensable. In my dissertation I study the extent to which methods used for credibility assessments in the EU asylum procedure are valid, with a special focus on origin. I conclude that the questions asked in asylum interviews are not sufficiently suitable to effectively distinguish between truthful and fabricated origin claims.
To assess credibility in asylum cases, the quality of the testimony is evaluated based on so-called credibility indicators. Mostly, these indicators are related to richness of detail, consistency, accuracy, and plausibility of the narrative. One issue with using these indicators is that there may be very different reasons than lying for a lack of detail or inconsistent, inaccurate or implausible accounts. Even an honest applicant may fail to provide a credible account according to these standards, especially when the questions in the asylum interview do not stimulate giving an elaborate and accurate account or do not fit with the asylum applicant’s memory for a place or event.
My dissertation shows that asylum interviews focusing on where the applicant comes from mainly consist of closed questions that only require a very short factual or yes/no answer. Such questions do not stimulate asylum seekers to thoroughly search their memory and tell their story in their own words. Instead, closed questions elicit short answers and even invoke guessing, thereby also compromising the accuracy of the answers. Moreover, the questions do not seem to match what people typically know and remember about their home environment.
To effectively assess origin claims, I therefore suggest a more open-ended interviewing strategy. Specifically, by using a free recall phase and by following up with more open-ended questions, more information can be obtained that is also more diagnostic for the truthfulness of the account. A free recall phase will not only stimulate the asylum applicant to give an elaborate, accurate and detailed account, but will also give the official information about what the interviewee knows and can tell about his or her hometown.
PhD thesis by Tanja van Veldhuizen
Published on Law Blogs Maastricht
-
Madrid Commercial court refers UEFA & FIFA’s anti-competitive kick to the ECJ
In early 2021, Europe’s twelve leading football clubs joined hands to create the European Super League. Despite the presence of notable clubs such as Liverpool, Manchester United, Milan, Barcelona and Real Madrid, the League soon fell apart. Unable to convince those on the football field, the three...
-
The Facebook whistleblower: what’s different this time? Part I
“I don’t hate Facebook. I love Facebook. I want to save it”, wrote Frances Haugen as she resigned from Facebook and revealed tens of thousands of documents alleging Facebook has time and again prioritized profit over people.
-
Mind if I mine?
The EU recently introduced text and data mining exceptions to copyright infringement. However, they are too narrow and situation-specific to enable scientific development. In my master thesis, I suggest adopting a non-enjoyment exception for new technological uses, including text and data mining.
