The status of refugee refers to activities in the political sphere and is sparsely applied in Sweden where subsidiary protection is much more common. Our aim was to analyse how the status of subsidiary protection is reached in the case of Somalis, by unpacking the inherent logic (or lack thereof) regarding tacit assumptions of what it means to be 'political'. The type of status matters because of the concrete and symbolic rights and recognition connected to it. It is also associated to the legitimacy of the asylum system as a whole. Qualitative analysis of 45 Somali asylum applicants' case files suggests that Somalis can be viewed as an extreme case of 'indefinables'; the subsumption of the individual to collective categories becomes clearly visible here. Although the law guarantees the right to an individual assessment, interest in the person is limited to aspects of the narrative that undermine moral character, rather than directed at restoring the political dimensions of individuals outside of citizenship in order to guarantee their human rights. The applicant receives a residence permit, but is symbolically rejected, first as 'political' and secondly as having legitimate personal motives for seeking protection.
Based on the assumption that credibility assessments function as 'normative leakage' within the asylum process, we analyse how narratives of gender and class are articulated, rendered meaningful, or silenced in credibility assessments. Two cases concerning male applicants are selected in order to illustrate these processes. In relation to the existing concepts of internal/external credibility, we wish to introduce the concept of social credibility, which focuses on how the assessors read different socio-cultural narratives. While previous research has shown that the postcolonial will to protect women favours women as victims of patriarchal cultures, we wish to point out the continuity of this line of argumentation in relation to male and female applicants by adopting a theoretical generalization: male applicants instead become situated at the other end of the spectrum of postcolonial notions of modernity as non-victims, victims of other circumstances or perpetrators. We argue that these processes are accentuated in relation to credibility assessments. In order to prevent processes of social exclusion and to enhance inclusive practice, authorities need to acknowledge the 'normative leakage' associated with the assessment process.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.