- May 2024
This article aims to raise awareness and build understanding of the impact of the digitalisation of border spaces on Venezuelan refugees.
When Adri,[1] a 43-year-old Venezuelan lawyer and mother, crossed the border between Venezuela and Brazil, she was struck by the array of technological equipment awaiting her arrival:
“When entering the tent for processing the documentation, I had a big surprise: it was fully equipped with computers, and we could hear the noise of the keys. The organisation assisting us reviewed my entry permit. I had to leave the mark of all my fingers, even use a kind of binoculars that captured the images of my eyes, but I don’t know why! Everything organised, respectful and military.”
Adri’s account emphasises a global trend in the management of borders in forced displacement: the increasing use of digital technologies by both states and humanitarian response actors and the need for forcibly displaced people to provide significant amounts of personal data to access humanitarian services, often with little information or awareness about how their data will be processed.
Digital migration and border governance includes direct and indirect interactions with individuals in transit, involving activities such as biometric data collection (through fingerprints, facial recognition and iris scanning), monitoring migration movements, digitisation of migration services, automated decision-making, creation of applications, and support via chatbots or one-way channels on social networks.
The digitisation of the migratory process may enhance the efficiency of migration management bureaucracy, streamlining the tasks of international agencies involved in issuing identity documentation and distributing humanitarian assistance to refugees. However, there is a risk that the digitisation of these processes contributes to perpetuating the vulnerabilities of refugees, as their data may be used for purposes beyond basic identification and aid provision, such as profit making, government surveillance and other undisclosed intentions. They may be seen either as victims of failed policies in their countries of origin or as potential suspects of past or future illegal activities.
Amid the complex landscape of technology adoption within migratory border governance, this article presents the opinions and experiences of 15 Venezuelan refugees who underwent biometric data collection at the Brazil-Venezuela border between 2019 and 2021. These individuals were interviewed and participated in focus groups on digital migration governance organised by the authors of this article. Before delving into an analysis of their responses, it is important to contextualise the digital framework established to manage Venezuelan refugees in Brazil.
Digital migration governance in the Brazil-Venezuela border
The recent militarisation of the Brazil-Venezuela border triggered the digitalisation of Brazilian migration governance through the adoption of internationally used models and narratives emphasising border security. At the border, digitised screening devices are employed, facilitating data exchange and the use of technological systems for migration control.
In 2021, the Brazilian Industrial Development Agency (ABDI), in partnership with the State Government of Roraima, launched the ‘Border Tech Project’ at a cost of R$3.1 million Brazilian Reais, or $618,000 in US dollar equivalent, to monitor the border between Brazil and Venezuela. The small border city of Pacaraima, acquired technologies, such as smart dimmable lights, smart lights with integrated cameras and surveillance, facial recognition software, speed dome sensing cameras, a datacentre for storing and processing images and data, video wall screens, licence plate recognition cameras, licence plate recognition software and a drone with a thermal camera.[2]
As part of the reception of Venezuelans arriving in Brazil, basic identification data and other more complex information is requested. After mandatory passage through the Federal Police, Venezuelan refugees go through a process of data collection, management and storage carried out by two institutional humanitarian response protocols: the PRIMES System (Population Registration and Identity Management EcoSystem), under the responsibility of UNHCR, and the Acolhedor System, administered by the Brazilian Government. The PRIMES system manages biometric data on a global storage basis, which according to UNHCR, aims to offer refugees a digital identity that allows them access to services. Through the system, UNHCR can authorise data access to host governments for collaborative efforts in terms of delivering services together with UNHCR. The data collected by the UNHCR team is used to identify actions to assist refugees and for managing shelter, providing documentation and relocating refugees within Brazil.
On the other hand, the Acolhedor System was put in place by the Brazilian government and designated as the official registry and database for its relocation programme. Non-biometric data collected by the system, such as name, education, courses, professions, qualifications and family data, Individual Taxpayer Registration (CPF), work card and vaccinations, are also subsequently recorded digitally. The Acolhedor System database allows data access and sharing with partner organisations, including Brazilian ministries, local government sectors, UN agencies, INGOs and civil society.
Paradoxically, both systems operate in the context of growing digital inequality facing Venezuelan refugees. On the one hand, migration governance is increasingly facilitated through platforms, providing training, financial resources, recreational activities, services, and digital recognition of refugee status; on the other hand, the journey of Venezuelan refugees to Brazil is marked by limited information and connectivity, highlighting the dimension of precariousness. Among the communication challenges Venezuelans face, access to digital resources and Wi-Fi to obtain continuous and reliable information stands out as crucial.
In the tension between information precarity among Venezuelans and the digitalisation of migration borders, we seek to understand individual data provision practices and subjective notions of information privacy from the perspective of vulnerable people. Among the Venezuelan migrants we interviewed, two prominent strategies emerged as a means to accomplish their objectives: 1) embracing a collaborative approach with authorities, and 2) navigating the complex balance between cooperative engagement and nuanced apprehension.
Logic of direct cooperation
Adopting a cooperative stance with migration authorities emerges as a pathway for Venezuelans to unlock the gateway to entry, stay and access to a myriad of benefits in Brazil. The following examples provide insights into Venezuelans’ experiences with biometric data collection and willingness to cooperate with the procedure.
Andre expressed his surprise at seeing the biometric devices used for fingerprint scanning and iris recognition: “It was different. I understood that it was to know better about who arrived in Brazil. I followed all the instructions and answered what they asked.”
Nora found biometric measurement devices strange until she learned that they were designed to identify unique characteristics of individuals:
“Well, I felt strange, but I understood that it was a way of identifying myself. At no time did I think anything bad, nor did I feel intimidated or anything. I was simply following the instructions they gave me.”
Maria was not surprised by the use of biometric technology and highlighted that going through the process of taking fingerprints and eye screening was necessary to cross international borders:
“It seemed very normal to me because I was already aware that to enter another country, they have to search you, they have to take your fingerprints, they have to go through that whole process, and it seemed normal to me, I didn’t feel intimidated or harassed.”
Some of the refugees interviewed felt it was important to comply with the process to demonstrate their trustworthiness. Luz, a 41-year-old nurse, explained: “I am transparent, I have nothing to hide. I came to work and help with whatever is needed. If that was the price to enter Brazil, deal done.”
There was also a perception of uniqueness or significance associated with undergoing biometric procedures. Edward reported that he was fascinated by the technology used in the biometric identification process: “I was excited. I had never seen those electronic devices. I felt like I was in a James Bond movie; everything was computerised, modern and high-tech.”
Logic of cooperation accompanied by nuanced apprehension
Even while adopting a cooperative stance, Venezuelans simultaneously have concerns, contention and doubts regarding the provision of data to migration authorities. Sharing personal data was a daunting and apprehensive experience for certain refugees interviewed. Hector, a 19-year-old student, arrived in Brazil as a minor and recalled the anxiety he experienced: “I had a little anxiety because I was a minor and thought they would send me back to Venezuela. When they put a machine to see my eyes, I thought: hmmm, can this machine tell my age?”
Driven by his fear of being detected by the iris scanning machine, Hector felt compelled to disclose his age and the traumatic experience of enduring sexual violence as a means of sustaining himself. This disclosure ultimately enabled access to essential healthcare support and shelter. Others exhibited unease concerning the possible exchange of data between the Brazilian and Venezuelan governments. For instance, Yara, a 32-year-old digital influencer, expressed her concerns about providing personal information because of political persecution by the Venezuelan regime.
Refugees’ concerns over the provision of their data were also associated with the lack of information about the use and sharing of their data. Most interviewees had limited or no understanding of data management practices within humanitarian contexts. Some speculated that their data might be stored in a national security database and shared with other humanitarian organisations, like IOM. Mario recalled that when he was seeking employment with the organisation, they already possessed all his information, requiring him only to submit his curriculum vitae. Upon questioning the purpose of data collection, Karen received information from the border police stating that it was for security purposes and a requirement for entry into Brazil. However, they did not provide further clarification regarding the ownership or control of this data.
Further insights and recommendations
This article highlights the importance of critically assessing biometric data collection practices and developing collaborative public policies addressing the issue. Currently, access to benefits, including shelter and relocation, is contingent upon providing data to these systems, but Venezuelans are not granted access to manage their own information. Informing refugees about these systems and the data being collected is a vital initial step in fostering an environment where informed consent can be obtained with dignity and respect, but other aspects must be taken into consideration by policymakers, humanitarian organisations and technology developers:
- Digital access and literacy can be influenced by factors such as social class, gender, age, race and cultural background. These factors can shape refugees’ experiences with reception, access to migration services, and the data collection process.
- It is crucial to ensure that refugees have unrestricted access to their own data storage platforms. Providing a dedicated space and autonomy for refugees to manage, update, correct inconsistencies, and even request the removal of their information through a formal withdrawal process are essential elements of a transparent data supply system.
- Consider the skills, insights and suggestions of refugees themselves to improve digital migration governance. Whether it involves creating platforms, data collection, information sharing, or implementing policies that impact refugee lives, it is crucial to incorporate refugees’ evaluations and viewpoints to ensure their needs and experiences are adequately addressed.
Julia Camargo
Lecturer at the International Relations course, Universidade Federal de Roraima (UFRR – Federal University of Roraima) and PhD candidate, ESPM (Sao Paulo)
julia.camargo@ufrr.br
Amanda Alencar
Associate Professor of Media and Migration, Erasmus University Rotterdam pazalencar@eshcc.eur.nl linkedin.com/in/amanda-alencar-76563654/
[1] Names changed to protect respondents’ identities.
[2] Part of the equipment purchased included products from Hikyvision, a globally renowned company specialising in electronic security solutions. However, this company had supplied similar equipment to the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States, which was subsequently deactivated in those countries due to concerns about unauthorised monitoring and data sharing.