Institutional testimonial injustice and asylum claims

People seeking international protection as refugees are often treated unjustly by receiving states. Examination of an institution that is key to the refugee system but underexplored by philosophers—namely, asylum adjudication—suggests that some of this unjust treatment is distinctly epistemic in nature. In this paper I identify five ways in which testimonial injustice may be institutionalized in asylum adjudication systems. I also anticipate and respond to an important challenge for diagnosing such injustice in real-world institutions. The resulting account should help us to identify testimonial injustice in asylum adjudication systems, and other institutions involved in credibility assessment.