To learn more about our research, please visit our main site at www.asyfair.com.
ASYFAIR examines whether consistency (defined as treating like cases alike) is possible given the disruptions that everyday life introduces to systems of control, and will raise the question of whether a fair, European asylum adjudication system actually exists. ASYFAIR critically reflects on the notions of ‘fairness’ and ‘consistency’ that circulate in political, public, legal, media and academic debates.
ASYFAIR aims to deconstruct and critique dominant notions of consistency and inconsistency in legal studies, border studies, legal geography and anthropology, and to offer a richer lexicon with which to describe and assess legal systems.
The EU, the UNHCR, and the Council of European Immigration Judges have issued detailed procedural instructions about how judges, representatives, applicants, interpreters and witnesses should conduct themselves in asylum hearings. This project opens new horizons in research into legal studies by employing a three-fold conceptualisation of what consistency is, that goes beyond approaches that valorise decisions, outcomes and legal results. Doing so subjects the lynchpin concept of procedural consistency to sustained, multi-methodological social scientific scrutiny for the first time.
ASYFAIR employs an innovative combination of methodologies that will produce unique and rich data sets including multi-sited legal ethnography, discourse analysis, interviews, and quantitative analysis, and is situated in multiple EU countries, such as Germany, France, the UK, Austria, Belgium, Greece and Italy.
ASYFAIR conducted long-term, ethnographic fieldwork in various courts in Germany.
ASYFAIR conducted fieldwork in the French asylum appeals court (CNDA).
ASYFAIR includes data from across the EU.
The right to a fair trial is a fundamental right and must be respected in practice everywhere in Europe. - Vĕra Jourová, EU Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality