Paper short abstract:

This paper focuses on the lawyers' work in the process of asylum application in France. It aims at exploring how lawyers contribute to the construction of the credibility as mediators, by translating the narrative into a legal argument and translating of the culture of the applicant to the judges.

Paper long abstract:

This paper aims at questioning the role played by the defense regarding the construction of credibility. It is based on the ethnographic case of the work of French lawyers, during the appeal phase at the National Court of Asylum. Though they are not decision-makers in the institutional meaning of being responsible for granting the refugee status, lawyers are nevertheless making decisions to “make their client win”. Here I would like to put the emphasis on one aspect of their work: their role as mediators between applicants and judges, in a general process of translation, first, the translating of a personal narrative into a legal argument, and second, the translating of the culture of the “other” to the judges. In two identified phases of their work, the file-work and the court hearing, they are continuously interpreting both seekers’ and judges’ intentions. When lawyers work with their clients on their narrative, they constantly refer to the judges’ potential reactions. Relying on their experience of the hearings, they project themselves into the eyes of the judges, to decide what should be said or not, but also to make their clients feel the judges’ mindset as an issue: they know that if the seekers do not understand the issues, they will not be able to answer the most relevantly. In their address at the hearing, lawyers try to translate the cultural background of their clients into the judges’ language. This paper will explore how concretely lawyers contribute to ensure the credibility of their clients.