Paper short abstract:

In asylum processes based on conversion to Christianity and fear of religious persecution, decision-makers employed by the secular state have to assess the credibility of the religious conversion. This paper outlines the tension between church and state in determining what makes a 'true' convert.

Paper long abstract:

Among recent migrations to Europe, asylum claims on the basis of fear of religious persecution following a conversion to Protestant Christianity are frequent, especially among Iranian and Afghan asylum seekers. Decision-makers employed by the secular state have to assess the genuineness of the religious conversion, and risks of practising Christianity in the country of origin of the applicant. The overwhelmingly negative decisions for converted asylum seekers in Germany have led to a conflict between churches who support converts and administrative courts. While churches lament the lack of consideration of pastors’ letters and statements as evidence for converts’ credibility, German courts maintain that judges have the right to assess the credibility of an appellant’s conversion (2 BvR 1838/15) and possibly override a pastor’s assessment of an appellant’s Christian faith. This paper draws on case law, ethnographic observations at church workshops and 30 asylum appeal hearings based on conversion at German courts, as well as interviews with all actors involved, to outline the tensions between church and state in the assessment of what makes a ‘true’ convert worthy of protection.