« We have our own kitchen » : distance et légitimité dans la production de savoir pour la procédure d’asile

Abstract

La stricte séparation entre la production d’informations sur les pays d’origine (COI pourcountry of origin information) et l’évaluation des demandes d’asile est une norme fondamentale de la pratique professionnelle des producteurs de COI. En se penchant sur l’unité COI norvégienne, cet article examine la manière dont cette séparation est matérialisée à travers une véritable infrastructure de distanciation mise en place autour des sites de production des COI. Ce dispositif se manifeste non seulement dans les discours et les pratiques, mais aussi dans les structures organisationnelles, les lieux et les normes légales qui participent à l’écologie de la situation d’expertise particulière que constituent les COI. Il participe à la construction de la légitimité des institutions, mais aussi des acteurs impliqués dans la production du savoir.

Negotiating research in the shadow of migration control: access, knowledge and cognitive authority

“…Arguably, COI professionals could be interesting potential partners for para‐ethnographic research, to draw on their self‐conscious, reflexive representations and narratives of the organisational cultures they evolve in (Holmes and Marcus ). Their expert position requires some level of reflexivity, especially as their training and everyday practices involve reflecting on their positionality regarding the asylum procedure (Rosset 2019b). Nonetheless, in our case, being ‘sensitised’ and ‘open’ to the field's representations seems to mean adhering to them even before entering the field.…”

“…While the analytical process includes the ‘codification’ and ‘classification’ of data, COI epistemology draws a line before two further key steps of qualitative analysis – ‘interpretation’ and ‘theorisation’. Instead, the ‘interpretation’ of facts for refugee status determination is the role of decision‐makers – caseworkers and asylum judges – and crossing this line is considered malpractice (Rosset 2019b).…”

“…Indeed, the expert knowledge they produce plays an instrumental role in refugee status determination and asylum policies, as well as a symbolic role in legitimising the procedures and the institutions in which they evolve (Boswell ; Rosset and Liodden ; van der Kist et al . ; Rosset 2019b).…”

“…Arguably, COI units produce both legibility for the state (producing operational knowledge) and legibility of the state (performing rational and objective decision making). Indeed, the expert knowledge they produce plays an instrumental role in refugee status determin ation and asylum policies, as well as a symbolic role in legitimising the procedures and the institutions in which they evolve (Boswell 2009;Rosset and Liodden 2015;van der Kist et al 2018;Rosset 2019b).…”

“…One important norm that emerged from this process is that the production of COI should be independent of its utilisation. This strict separation fosters the legitimacy of the actors, procedures and institutions involved (Rosset 2019b). Accordingly, actors within the field saw an exclusive focus on the COI units per se as a more relevant level of analysis.…”