This article is available open access under a CC BY 4.0 license as part of Berghahn Open Anthro,
a subscribe-to-open model for APC-free open access made possible by the journal’s subscribers.
JUDI T H BEY E R
Asylum Interviews in the UK
The Problem of Evidence and
the Possibility of Applied Anthropology
Abstract: Evidence and credibility assessments are an important part of asylum procedure in the
UK. But answers given in the asylum interviews cannot be measured against an independent standard. This is particularly the case if the applicant claims to be stateless. Drawing on ethnomethodology, I analyse asylum interviews and show in what ways evidence can rather be understood as the
result of an asymmetrical co-construction. Consequently, the individual applicant disappears and a
‘case’ is established. Anthropologists who write country of origin reports based on such ‘case material’ for tribunals and courts can highlight the asymmetries in evidence-making and question the
very categorisations through which the state operates. The article contributes to ongoing debates on
the role of anthropologists and their knowledge as experts in court.
Keywords: applied anthropology, asylum, evidence, statelessness, UK
Since leaving the EU in 2020, the British government has been trying to deport migrants
from its territory even before they can apply for asylum. By declaring their entry ‘illegal’ if they did not enter through a narrow scheme, the government thus criminalises
refugees and migration as such (Beyer 2023). The previous Tory-led government
(until July 2024) had issued the notorious Illegal Migration Bill in 2022, which was
repealed by the Labour Party once it assumed governmental office. But even under the
new government, the illegalisation of migration has continued unabatedly. On X, the
Labour Party proudly announced that ‘raids and arrests of those working here illegally
have increased by 38 percent. We said we’d crack down on illegal working. We are.’1
In addition to a draft bill on securing the border, a new version of the so-called ‘Good
Character Requirement’ was released in February 2025 that aims at preventing all ‘illegal’ migrants and their UK-born children from ever receiving British citizenship, thus
possibly rendering thousands of children born in Britain stateless. Even under these
harsh conditions, migrants do continue to seek and apply for asylum.
In this article, I interrogate the process how evidence is established in asylum procedure by engaging with anthropological and socio-legal literature on evidence and
credibility assessments. The literature is critical throughout, highlighting the inherent uncertainty of knowledge in asylum procedure. Many authors in this field have
focused on the courts and particularly on how judges establish and weigh evidence.2
My aim is to expand this body of literature by showing how already in the initial asylum
interviews the groundwork for evidence is being laid, rather than only at a later stage.
Social Anthropology/Anthropologie Sociale (2025) 33.3: 51–65 © The Author(s)
doi:10.3167/saas.2025.330305
Published on behalf of the European Association of Social Anthropologists