Authorities in Western countries, like the Netherlands, believe that after thorough investigation it is possible to separate genuine refugees from non-genuine refugees. Members of the first group... Show moreAuthorities in Western countries, like the Netherlands, believe that after thorough investigation it is possible to separate genuine refugees from non-genuine refugees. Members of the first group deserve admission, because they had a well-founded fear of persecution in their countries of origin. Non-genuine refugees, also called fortune hunters, were rejected, often because of credibility concerns. Individual case files of asylum seekers show which arguments were used to justify rejections or admissions. Case files contain a variety of letters and memos written by civil servants, neighbours, employers, relatives, friends, classmates of the children, churches, family doctors, refugee aid groups, lawyers, and scholars. All these insiders and outsiders explained why a particular asylum seeker deserved admission or not. This dissertation shows that civil servants were sensitive to the pressure of outsiders. In first instance, many asylum seekers were rejected, but if the asylum procedure dragged on, decisions were altered. This research displays the variety of arguments that were used in the period 1945-1994. Often arguments not related to the flight were decisive: humanitarian arguments, personal characteristics of the applicant (special skills), criticism on the asylum procedure (the asylum seeker waited too long) and being beneficial to the Dutch society. Show less
